Re: KVM performance vs. Xen

[Andrew Theurer <habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 1) I'm seeing about 2.3% in scheduler functions [that I recognize].
>>>> Does that seems a bit excessive?
>>>
>>> Yes, it is.  If there is a lot of I/O, this might be due to the 
>>> thread pool used for I/O.
>>
>> This is why I wrote the linux-aio patch.  It only reduced CPU 
>> consumption by about 2% although I'm not sure if that's absolute or 
>> relative.  Andrew?
If  I recall correctly, it was 2.4% and relative.  But with 2.3% in 
scheduler functions, that's what I expected.
>
> Was that before or after the entire path was made copyless?
If this is referring to the preadv/writev support, no, I have not tested 
with that.

-Andrew