Scott,
I don't know if I have anything valuable information to contribute to your questions but I'll try anyway. Where the VM and the display on the same physical machine? I believe SPICE tries to figure out the capabilities of both sides and balance the performance. There might be more overhead if both are on the same machine (guessing). There was no real difference if the display (SPICE client) was on the same Linux machine or on a separate Windows system. What I am looking for is a fast solution for graphics integrated into QEMU/KVM. I don't actually need the remote networking stuff. Everything should run on the same Linux machine. Alternatively VGA passthrough would be the solution, but currently it does not exist for QEMU/KVM and it would introduce hardware dependencies. I am really wondering if running QXL/SPICE on the same machine shouldn't be faster as the old QEMU way with emulating a standard VGA card. Thanks Stefan -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Scott Dowdle [mailto:dow...@montanalinux.org] Gesendet: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 9:03 PM An: Stefan Zintgraf Betreff: Re: [Spice-devel] SPICE questions Stefan, ----- "Stefan Zintgraf" <s.zintg...@acontis.com> wrote: > I got it compiled and running now! > > I had to insert a lot of casts and do some tricking with the libasound > librar y (had to use the 32 bit one) and finally it compiled and even > started. > > But the results are quite disappointing with a Windows XP virtual > machine. > > In my virtual machine the "Red Hat QXL GPU" driver is installed as > well the "Red Hat Virtual Desktop Interface Port" driver. > > Compared with Microsoft Remote Desktop the results are disappointing > and even if I run QEMU without the qxl and spice option the results > are better. > > Has anybody an idea what I am doing wrong, how can I find out what may > be the reason? > > Another point: the spice client seems to be very unstable in specific > situations. > > When I opened MS Powerpoint and went to a specific slide with a lot of > graphics it regularly crashed without leaving any message. There was > no difference whether I used the self-compiled Linux client or the > downloaded Windows binaries. > > Especially the speed behavior is important for me to decide if using > SPICE is the right way to go and then to possibly contribute where > necessary. I don't know if I have anything valuable information to contribute to your questions but I'll try anyway. Where the VM and the display on the same physical machine? I believe SPICE tries to figure out the capabilities of both sides and balance the performance. There might be more overhead if both are on the same machine (guessing). Gabe Knuth (the other guy on brianmadden.com) claimed in his article about Virtual Bridges VERDE product... that the public bits of SPICE that have been released are fairly unusable. It came up with he asked the VB folks if they are considering adopting SPICE. The answer was no, they'll use their modified VNC protocol which they claim is darn fast too... and that SPICE was fairly broken. Gabe said he was gathering his facts and planning on doing an article about SPICE in the near future. This week though, they are doing GeekWeek where they are installing a different VDI solution every day for 5 days straight... documenting and videoing everything... and then after some post-production time plan on releasing an article per day. Does anyone care to comment on the status and usability of SPICE today? Are the public bits that were released the same bits that Red Hat is using in their RHEV for Desktops beta? TYL, -- Scott Dowdle 704 Church Street Belgrade, MT 59714 (406)388-0827 [home] (406)994-3931 [work]
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
