From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
To: Erik Brakkee <erik@brakkee.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: KVM performance Java server/MySQL...
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:18:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130207201851.GA19412@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47389.212.61.137.176.1360251691.squirrel@brakkee.org>
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 04:41:31PM +0100, Erik Brakkee wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> We have been benchmarking a java server application (java 6 update 29)
> that requires a mysql database. The scenario is quite simple. We open a
> web page which displays a lot of search results. To get the content of the
> page one big query is done with many smaller queries to retrieve the data.
> The test from the java side is single threaded.
>
> We have used the following deployment scenarios:
> 1. JBoss in VM, MySql in separate VM
> 2. JBoss in VM, MySQL native
> 3. JBoss native, MySQL in vm.
> 4. JBoss native and MySQL native on the same physical machine
> 5. JBoss and MySQL virtualized on the same VM.
>
> What we see is that the performance (time to execute) is practically the
> same for all scenarios (approx. 30 seconds), except for scenario 4 that
> takes approx. 21 seconds. This difference is quite large and contrasts
> many other test on the internet and other benchmarks we did previously.
>
> We have tried pinning the VMs, turning hyperthreading off, varying the CPU
> model (including host-passthrough), but this did not have any significant
> impact.
>
> The hardware on which we are running is a dual socket E5-2650 machine with
> 64 GB memory. The server is a Dell poweredge R720 server with SAS disks,
> RAID controller with battery backup (writeback cache). Transparent huge
> pages is turned on.
>
> We are at a loss to explain the differences in the test. In particular, we
> would have expected the least performance when both were running
> virtualized and we would have expected a better performance when JBoss and
> MySQL were running virtualized in the same VM as compared to JBoss and
> MySQL both running in different virtual machines. It looks like we are
> dealing with multiple issues here and not just one.
>
> Right now we have a 30% penalty for running virtualized which is too much
> for us; 10% would be allright. What would you suggest to do to
> troubleshoot this further?
>
What is you kernel/qemu versions and command line you are using to start
a VM?
--
Gleb.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-07 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-07 15:41 KVM performance Java server/MySQL Erik Brakkee
2013-02-07 20:18 ` Gleb Natapov [this message]
2013-02-08 9:13 ` Erik Brakkee
2013-02-08 9:19 ` Erik Brakkee
[not found] ` <44180.83.163.128.75.1360314833.squirrel@brakkee.org>
2013-02-08 11:00 ` Erik Brakkee
2013-02-08 11:56 ` David Cruz
2013-02-13 8:59 ` Erik Brakkee
2013-02-13 13:23 ` Erik Brakkee
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=20130207201851.GA19412@redhat.com \
--to=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=erik@brakkee.org \
--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.