From: xuehai zhang <hai@cs.uchicago.edu>
To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
Cc: "Petersson, Mats" <mats.petersson@amd.com>,
Tim Freeman <tfreeman@mcs.anl.gov>,
Kate Keahey <keahey@mcs.anl.gov>,
Xen Mailing List <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: open/stat64 syscalls run faster on Xen VM than standard Linux
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:27:54 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <438B300A.8080209@cs.uchicago.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1133194042.3976.2.camel@orbit.scot.redhat.com>
Stephen,
Thanks for the reply.
>>I mounted the loopback file in dom0, chrooted to the mountpoint and redid the experiment. The
>>results is attached below. The time of open and stat64 calls is similar to the XenLinux case and
>>also much smaller than the standard Linux case. So, either using loopback file as backend of
>>XenLinux or directly mounting it in local filesystem will result in some benefit (maybe just caused
>>by the extra layer of block caching) for the performance of some system calls.
>
>
> What time, exactly, is being measured here? Is it wall-clock
> gettimeofday? Or only elapsed time inside the domU?
The time is collected and reported by strace by using the gettimeofday function.
> It would be
> enlightening to re-measure the performance by counting the number of
> times these operations can be completed in a second, just to get a
> second opinion and to determine if the difference is genuine or if it's
> just an artifact of how we're measuring time when multiple domains are
> involved.
Your questioning makes sense to me. But I am not very sure about how to effectively count how many
these operations can be completed in a second. Can you give me some hint?
Thanks again.
Xuehai
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-28 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-28 14:45 open/stat64 syscalls run faster on Xen VM than standard Linux Petersson, Mats
2005-11-28 15:28 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 15:50 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 16:07 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-11-28 16:27 ` xuehai zhang [this message]
2005-11-28 17:10 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-11-29 4:50 ` Tim Freeman
2005-11-29 13:27 ` xuehai zhang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-29 12:59 Petersson, Mats
2005-11-29 13:48 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 18:17 Petersson, Mats
2005-11-28 16:15 Petersson, Mats
2005-11-28 17:16 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 19:37 ` Anthony Liguori
2005-11-28 14:36 Petersson, Mats
2005-11-28 14:47 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 8:21 xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 14:38 ` Anthony Liguori
2005-11-28 14:59 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-29 12:39 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-29 12:58 ` xuehai zhang
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=438B300A.8080209@cs.uchicago.edu \
--to=hai@cs.uchicago.edu \
--cc=keahey@mcs.anl.gov \
--cc=mats.petersson@amd.com \
--cc=sct@redhat.com \
--cc=tfreeman@mcs.anl.gov \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/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.