From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: windows domU disk performance graph comparing hvm vs stubdom vs pv drivers Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:44:24 -0500 Message-ID: <20100223144424.GB25741@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <5411dbdc1002191441q4becdba9o61168bc986533e6@mail.gmail.com> <5411dbdc1002220914m2cf15fack76aed42a4fca1a32@mail.gmail.com> <5411dbdc1002221313y59866dd2k3ba528fe2b5499d@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Keith Coleman List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > > > That is strange because in that configuration I get a far better > > > disk bandwidth with stubdoms compared to qemu running in dom0. > > > > > > > What type of test are you doing? > > > > these are the results I got a while ago running a simple "dd if=/dev/zero > of=file" for 10 seconds: Keep in mind that iometer (both the Windows a Linux version) by default do random seak of 50% reads and 50% writes. They do have some set of templates - "web server", "file server", "database server" that change the read/write ratio, size of blocks, and the queue length.(fyi, you can use fio to set the same values, if you can't get dynamo to compile on your Linux box). Keith, which workload did you choose?