From: Steven Haigh <netwiz@crc.id.au>
To: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: 4.2.1: Poor write performance for DomU.
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:49:05 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51249C11.3050800@crc.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51248E23.7060408@crc.id.au>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2143 bytes --]
On 20/02/2013 7:49 PM, Steven Haigh wrote:
> On 20/02/2013 7:26 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On 20/02/13 03:10, Steven Haigh wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> Firstly, please CC me in to any replies as I'm not a subscriber these
>>> days.
>>>
>>> I've been trying to debug a problem with Xen 4.2.1 where I am unable to
>>> achieve more than ~50Mb/sec sustained sequential write to a disk. The
>>> DomU is configured as such:
>>
>> Since you mention 4.2.1 explicitly, is this a performance regression
>> from previous versions? (4.2.0 or the 4.1 branch)
>
> This is actually a very good question. I've reinstalled my older
> packages of Xen 4.1.3 back on the system. Rebooting into the new
> hypervisor, then starting the single DomU again. Ran bonnie++ again on
> the DomU:
>
> Still around 50Mb/sec - so this doesn't seem to be a regression, but
> something else?
I've actually done a bit of thinking about this... A recent thread on
linux-raid kernel mailing list about Xen and DomU throughput made me
revisit my setup. I know I used to be able to saturate GigE both ways
(send and receive) to the samba share served by this DomU. This would
mean I'd get at least 90-100Mbyte/sec. What exact config and kernel/xen
versions this was as this point in time I cannot say.
As such, I had a bit of a play and recreated my RAID6 with 64Kb chunk
size. This seemed to make rebuild/resync speeds way worse - so I
reverted to 128Kb chunk size.
The benchmarks I am getting from the Dom0 is about what I'd expect - but
I wouldn't expect to lose 130Mb/sec write speed to the phy:/ pass
through of the LV.
From my known config where I could saturate the GigE connection, I have
changed from kernel 2.6.32 (Jeremy's git repo) to the latest vanilla
kernels - currently 3.7.9.
My build of Xen 4.2.1 also has all of the recent security advisories
patched as well. Although it is interesting to note that downgrading to
Xen 4.1.2 made no difference to write speeds.
--
Steven Haigh
Email: netwiz@crc.id.au
Web: http://www.crc.id.au
Phone: (03) 9001 6090 - 0412 935 897
Fax: (03) 8338 0299
[-- Attachment #1.2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4240 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-20 9:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-20 2:10 4.2.1: Poor write performance for DomU Steven Haigh
2013-02-20 8:26 ` Roger Pau Monné
2013-02-20 8:49 ` Steven Haigh
2013-02-20 9:49 ` Steven Haigh [this message]
2013-02-20 10:12 ` Jan Beulich
2013-02-20 11:06 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-02-20 11:08 ` Steven Haigh
2013-02-20 12:48 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-02-20 13:18 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2013-03-08 20:42 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-03-08 8:54 ` Steven Haigh
2013-03-08 9:43 ` Roger Pau Monné
2013-03-08 9:46 ` Steven Haigh
2013-03-08 9:54 ` Roger Pau Monné
2013-03-08 20:49 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-03-08 22:30 ` Steven Haigh
2013-03-11 13:30 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-03-11 13:37 ` Steven Haigh
2013-03-12 13:04 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-03-12 14:08 ` Steven Haigh
[not found] ` <514EA337.7030303@crc.id.au>
[not found] ` <514EA6B0.8010504@crc.id.au>
[not found] ` <514EA741.7050403@crc.id.au>
2013-03-24 9:10 ` Steven Haigh
2013-03-24 9:54 ` Steven Haigh
2013-03-25 2:21 ` Steven Haigh
2013-08-20 16:48 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-08-20 18:25 ` Steven Haigh
2013-09-05 8:28 ` Steven Haigh
2013-09-06 13:33 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-09-06 23:06 ` Steven Haigh
2013-09-06 23:37 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
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=51249C11.3050800@crc.id.au \
--to=netwiz@crc.id.au \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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.