From: "René Pfeiffer" <lynx@luchs.at>
To: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: I/O performance of VirtIO
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:54:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091012215401.GE10688@nightfall.luchs.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AD3A38D.3090102@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2165 bytes --]
On Oct 13, 2009 at 0145 +0400, Michael Tokarev appeared and said:
> René Pfeiffer wrote:
> >Hello!
> >
> >I just tested qemu-kvm-0.11.0 with the KVM module of kernel 2.6.31.1. I
> >noticed that the I/O performance of an unattended stock Debian Lenny
> >install dropped somehow. The test machines ran with kvm-88 and 2.6.30.x
> >before. The difference is very noticeable (went from about 5 minutes up
> >to 15-25 minutes). The two test machines have different CPUs (one is an
> >Intel Core2 CPU, the other runs with an AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual).
> >
> >Is this the effect of added code regarding caching/data integrity to the
> >VirtIO block layer or somewhere else? The qemu-system-x86_64 seems to
> >hang a lot more in heavy I/O (showing 'D' in top/htop).
> >
> >The command line is quite straight-forward:
> >qemu-system-x86_64 -drive file=debian.qcow2,if=virtio,boot=on -cdrom \
> >/srv/isos/debian-502-i386-netinst.iso -smp 2 -boot d -m 512 -net nic \
> >-net user -usb
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Care to try with something more real than user-level networking?
Yes, I tried that on the other machine. It made not much difference (the
installation files are on local Squid proxies).
But I found that setting cache=writeback restores the old behaviour. I
think the default changed to cache=writethrough.
> You're using netinstall which - apparently - tries to use some
> networking d/loading components etc, and userlevel networking is
> known to be very very slow....
Right, I just verified the disk I/O performance with severall runs of
hdparm and fresh installations using cache=none, cache=writeback and
cache=writethrough settings. The network settings were the same (the
test machine with the software bridge setup is down at the moment). I
wanted to compare the behaviour of the I/O load.
Best,
René.
--
)\._.,--....,'``. fL Let GNU/Linux work for you while you take a nap.
/, _.. \ _\ (`._ ,. R. Pfeiffer <lynx at luchs.at> + http://web.luchs.at/
`._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' - System administration + Consulting + Teaching -
Got mail delivery problems? http://web.luchs.at/information/blockedmail.php
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-12 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-12 20:49 I/O performance of VirtIO René Pfeiffer
2009-10-12 21:45 ` Michael Tokarev
2009-10-12 21:54 ` René Pfeiffer [this message]
2009-10-13 6:35 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-10-22 16:29 ` Avi Kivity
2009-10-22 22:06 ` Alexander Graf
2009-10-25 5:44 ` Avi Kivity
2009-10-26 8:12 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-10-26 8:35 ` Avi Kivity
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=20091012215401.GE10688@nightfall.luchs.at \
--to=lynx@luchs.at \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.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.