From: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
To: Michael Schinzel <schinzel@ip-projects.de>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: Roger Pau Monne <roger.paumonne@citrix.com>,
Thomas Toka <toka@ip-projects.de>
Subject: Re: Read Performance issue when Xen Hypervisor is activated
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 18:03:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1484240629.9947.18.camel@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a8ce81db36d142b5a1957468e6b8a547@ip-projects.de>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5058 bytes --]
On Mon, 2017-01-02 at 07:15 +0000, Michael Schinzel wrote:
> Good Morning,
>
I'm back, although, as anticipate, I can't be terribly useful, I'm
afraid...
> You can see, in default Xen configuration, the most important thing
> at read performance test -> 2414.92 MB/sec <- the used cache is half
> of the cache like the same host is bootet without hypervisor. We now
> searched and searched and searched and find the Case:
> xen_acpi_processor
>
> Xen is manageing the CPU Performance default with 1.200 Mhz. It is
> like you are driving a Ferrari all the time with 30 miles/h :) So we
> changed the Performance parameter to
>
> xenpm set-scaling-governor all performance
>
Well, yes, this will have an impact, but it's unlikely what you're
looking for. In fact, something similar would apply also to baremetal
Linux.
> After a little bit searching around, i also find a parameter for the
> scheduler.
>
> root@v7:~# cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
> noop deadline [cfq]
>
> I changed the scheduler to deadline. After this Change
>
Well, ISTR [nop] could be even better. But I don't think this will make
much difference either, in this case.
> We have already tried to remove the CPU reservation, memory limit and
> so on but this don't change anythink. Also upgrading the Hypervisor
> dont change anythink at this performance issue.
>
Well, these are all sequential benchmarks, so it indeed could have been
expected that adding more vCPUs wouldn't have changed things much.
I decided to re-run some of your tests on my test hardware (which is
way lower end than yours, especially as far as storage is concerned).
These are m results:
hdparm -Tt /dev/sda Without Xen (baremetal Linux) With Xen (from within dom0)
Timing cached reads 14074 MB in 2.00 seconds = 7043.05 MB/sec 14694 MB in 1.99 seconds = 7382.22 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads 364 MB in 3.01 seconds = 120.78 MB/sec 364 MB in 3.00 seconds = 121.22 MB/sec
dd_obs_test.sh datei transfer rate
block size Without Xen (baremetal Linux) With Xen (from within dom0)
512 279 MB/s 123 MB/s
1024 454 MB/s 217 MB/s
2048 275 MB/s 359 MB/s
4096 888 MB/s 532 MB/s
8192 987 MB/s 659 MB/s
16384 1.0 GB/s 685 MB/s
32768 1.1 GB/s 773 MB/s
65536 1.1 GB/s 846 MB/s
131072 1.1 GB/s 749 MB/s
262144 327 MB/s 844 MB/s
524288 1.1 GB/s 783 MB/s
1048576 420 MB/s 823 MB/s
2097152 485 MB/s 305 MB/s
4194304 409 MB/s 783 MB/s
8388608 380 MB/s 776 MB/s
16777216 950 MB/s 703 MB/s
33554432 916 MB/s 297 MB/s
67108864 856 MB/s 492 MB/s
time dd if=/dev/zero of=datei bs=1M count=10240
Without Xen (baremetal Linux) With Xen (from within dom0)
73.7224 s, 146 MB/s 97.6948 s, 110 MB/s
real 1m13.724s real 1m37.700s
user 0m0.000s user 0m0.068s
sys 0m9.364s sys 0m15.180s
root@Zhaman:~# time dd if=datei of=/dev/null
Without Xen (baremetal Linux) With Xen (from within dom0)
9.92787 s, 1.1 GB/s 95.1827 s, 113 MB/s
real 0m9.953s real 1m35.194s
user 0m2.096s user 0m10.632s
sys 0m7.300s sys 0m51.820s
Which confirms that, when running the tests inside a Xen Dom0, things
are indeed slower.
Let me say something, though: the purpose of Xen is not to achieve the
best possible performance in Dom0. In fact, it is to achieve the best
possible aggregated performance of a number of guest domains.
The fact that virtualization has an overhead and that Dom0 pays quite a
high price are well known. Have you tried, for instance, running some
of the test in a DomU?
Now, whether what both you and I are seeing is to be considered
"normal", I can't tell. Maybe Roger can (or he can tell us who to
bother for that).
In general, I don't think updating random system and firmware
components is useful at all... This is not a BIOS issue, IMO.
Regards,
Dario
--
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 127 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-12 17:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-27 14:26 Read Performance issue when Xen Hypervisor is activated Michael Schinzel
2016-12-30 16:34 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-12-30 16:53 ` Michael Schinzel
2016-12-31 9:07 ` Michael Schinzel
2017-01-02 7:15 ` Michael Schinzel
2017-01-12 17:03 ` Dario Faggioli [this message]
2017-01-13 13:32 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-12-26 11:48 Michael Schinzel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1484240629.9947.18.camel@citrix.com \
--to=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
--cc=roger.paumonne@citrix.com \
--cc=schinzel@ip-projects.de \
--cc=toka@ip-projects.de \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.