Sounds about right. I will qualify that by stating I don't run my Citrix VM's at anything near 100% of their vCPU's. This is almost never a bottleneck on an x32 terminal server in my experience. They run out of memory well before CPU. Most of the docs I have read on this topic seem to echo that you don't need to factor in dedicating an extra core for the hypervisor. YMMV. On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Joe Shonk <joe.shonk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Oh, really? We see approx 10% utilization for dom0. > > > > Joe > > > > *From:* thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On > Behalf Of *Matt Kosht > *Sent:* Monday, February 22, 2010 8:15 AM > > *To:* thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* [THIN] Re: Citrix and VMWare > > > > I think you will have better results splitting that RAM amongst more VM's. > If the object of your efforts is consolidation/user density on a physical > server this is a superior approach. This is proven in > http://projectvrc.com testing. > > > > You don't need to dedicate a core to XS it uses so little CPU that it makes > no difference in my experience. > > -Matt > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Foster, Bill <Bill.Foster@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Thank you Matt for the response, > > > > > > We actually are trying the PAE switch based on a discussion with Citrix > Consulting. They say this is a good general purpose setup for 9-12gb of ram, > after that you will run into kernel memory issues. We don’t over commit > CPU’s or memory so we are ok there. > > > > One question, you commit all 8 CPU’s to VM’s , You don’t leave at least 1 > for XenServer? > > > > Bill Foster > > Sr Systems Engineer, IT > > Wellcare Health Plans, Inc. > > 8735 Henderson Road > > Tampa, FL 33634 > > Ren1, First Floor > > 813-206-1158 > > Bill.Foster@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > *From:* thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On > Behalf Of *Matt Kosht > *Sent:* Monday, February 22, 2010 9:04 AM > *To:* thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* [THIN] Re: Citrix and VMWare > > > > PAE actually makes term server run poorly with most application sets. I > would definitely recommend disabling it. > http://community.citrix.com/display/ocb/2008/08/04/PAE+This%21%21%21+Optimizing+XenApp > > > > Best 32 bit/W2K3R2 setup I have found is 2vCPU/4GB RAM for each VM. Make > sure you don't overuse cores. there shouldn't be anymore vCPU's than cores > on your physical server. Memory shouldn't be overcommitted either (I reserve > 2GB RAM for XenServer). On a 24GB Dual Quad (not Nehalem) blade I > comfortably get (4) Citrix server VM's with the config above. > > > > -Matt > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Foster, Bill <Bill.Foster@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > We are running PS 4.0 on XenServer 5.5 update2 using Provisioning server as > the deployment method(caching on local disk). > > > > 2 vCPU’s > > 8 gb ram with PAE turned on. > > > > Getting a 3-1 consolidation of this config. Our apps are memory starved and > not CPU. > > > > > > Bill Foster > > Sr Systems Engineer, IT > > Wellcare Health Plans, Inc. > > 8735 Henderson Road > > Tampa, FL 33634 > > Ren1, First Floor > > 813-206-1158 > > Bill.Foster@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > *From:* thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On > Behalf Of *Minero, Hector B CIV NSWCDD, K55 > *Sent:* Thursday, February 18, 2010 12:30 PM > *To:* thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* [THIN] Citrix and VMWare > > > > > > Hi all, does anyone have any guidelines for Citrix VM servers on ESX 4.0? > I currently have 5 Windows 2003 R2 PS 4.5 servers on ESX 4.0. They are > assigned 1 virtual CPU and 2GB of Memory. > They're all spiking up to 100%CPU for extended periods of time with about > 15 users each. Should I have 2 CPUs or 4? > Any other advice would help. > > Thanks, > > *_______________________________* > Hector Minero > > Privacy Notice: This electronic mail message, and any attachments, are > confidential and are intended for > > the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is > proprietary and that may be > > Individually Identifiable or Protected Health Information under HIPAA. If you > are not the intended > > recipient, please immediately contact the sender by telephone, or by email, > and destroy all copies of this > > message. If you are a regular recipient of our electronic mail, please notify > us promptly if you change > > your email address. > > > > Privacy Notice: This electronic mail message, and any attachments, are > confidential and are intended for > > the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is > proprietary and that may be > > Individually Identifiable or Protected Health Information under HIPAA. If you > are not the intended > > recipient, please immediately contact the sender by telephone, or by email, > and destroy all copies of this > > message. If you are a regular recipient of our electronic mail, please notify > us promptly if you change > > your email address. > > >