From: Konstantin Krotov <kkv@clodo.ru>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: [Qemu-devel] virtio-blk and virtio-scsi performance comparison
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 11:17:56 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <552E1EB4.3030805@clodo.ru> (raw)
Hello list!
I performed tests with fio and obtained results:
*** virtio-scsi with cache=none, io=threads, blok device is md-device
from mdadm raid1, random r/w, 32 thread from guest (debian, kernel 3.16):
fio fio1
readtest: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio,
iodepth=32
fio-2.1.11
Starting 1 process
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m(1)] [100.0% done] [126.2MB/125.1MB/0KB /s]
[32.3K/32.3K/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
readtest: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=707: Wed Apr 8 07:35:01 2015
read : io=5117.4MB, bw=125830KB/s, iops=31457, runt= 41645msec
slat (usec): min=4, max=343, avg=11.45, stdev=10.24
clat (usec): min=104, max=16667, avg=484.09, stdev=121.96
lat (usec): min=112, max=16672, avg=495.90, stdev=123.67
clat percentiles (usec):
| 1.00th=[ 302], 5.00th=[ 346], 10.00th=[ 374], 20.00th=[ 406],
| 30.00th=[ 426], 40.00th=[ 446], 50.00th=[ 462], 60.00th=[ 482],
| 70.00th=[ 506], 80.00th=[ 540], 90.00th=[ 596], 95.00th=[ 732],
| 99.00th=[ 948], 99.50th=[ 996], 99.90th=[ 1176], 99.95th=[ 1240],
| 99.99th=[ 1384]
bw (KB /s): min=67392, max=135216, per=99.99%, avg=125813.01,
stdev=12524.05
write: io=5114.7MB, bw=125763KB/s, iops=31440, runt= 41645msec
slat (usec): min=4, max=388, avg=11.85, stdev=10.47
clat (usec): min=147, max=8968, avg=505.23, stdev=127.40
lat (usec): min=155, max=8973, avg=517.45, stdev=128.97
clat percentiles (usec):
| 1.00th=[ 334], 5.00th=[ 370], 10.00th=[ 394], 20.00th=[ 426],
| 30.00th=[ 446], 40.00th=[ 462], 50.00th=[ 478], 60.00th=[ 498],
| 70.00th=[ 524], 80.00th=[ 556], 90.00th=[ 628], 95.00th=[ 756],
| 99.00th=[ 988], 99.50th=[ 1064], 99.90th=[ 1288], 99.95th=[ 1368],
| 99.99th=[ 2224]
bw (KB /s): min=67904, max=136384, per=99.99%, avg=125746.89,
stdev=12449.56
lat (usec) : 250=0.05%, 500=64.27%, 750=30.80%, 1000=4.20%
lat (msec) : 2=0.67%, 4=0.01%, 10=0.01%, 20=0.01%
cpu : usr=18.03%, sys=76.42%, ctx=26617, majf=0, minf=7
IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%,
>=64=0.0%
submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%,
>=64=0.0%
complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%,
>=64=0.0%
issued : total=r=1310044/w=1309348/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=5117.4MB, aggrb=125829KB/s, minb=125829KB/s,
maxb=125829KB/s, mint=41645msec, maxt=41645msec
WRITE: io=5114.7MB, aggrb=125762KB/s, minb=125762KB/s,
maxb=125762KB/s, mint=41645msec, maxt=41645msec
Disk stats (read/write):
sda: ios=1302885/1302192, merge=55/0, ticks=281040/321660,
in_queue=601264, util=99.29%
same guest,
*** virtio-blk with cache=none, io=threads, blok device is md-device
from mdadm raid1, random r/w, 32 thread from guest (debian, kernel 3.16):
fio fio1
readtest: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=4K-4K/4K-4K/4K-4K, ioengine=libaio,
iodepth=32
fio-2.1.11
Starting 1 process
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [m(1)] [100.0% done] [123.7MB/123.3MB/0KB /s]
[31.7K/31.6K/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
readtest: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=810: Wed Apr 8 07:26:37 2015
read : io=5117.4MB, bw=148208KB/s, iops=37051, runt= 35357msec
slat (usec): min=2, max=2513, avg= 7.27, stdev=10.28
clat (usec): min=104, max=10716, avg=382.30, stdev=113.38
lat (usec): min=108, max=10719, avg=389.94, stdev=115.48
clat percentiles (usec):
| 1.00th=[ 215], 5.00th=[ 249], 10.00th=[ 270], 20.00th=[ 298],
| 30.00th=[ 318], 40.00th=[ 338], 50.00th=[ 358], 60.00th=[ 386],
| 70.00th=[ 418], 80.00th=[ 462], 90.00th=[ 516], 95.00th=[ 572],
| 99.00th=[ 756], 99.50th=[ 820], 99.90th=[ 996], 99.95th=[ 1176],
| 99.99th=[ 2256]
bw (KB /s): min=119296, max=165456, per=99.94%, avg=148124.33,
stdev=11834.17
write: io=5114.7MB, bw=148129KB/s, iops=37032, runt= 35357msec
slat (usec): min=2, max=2851, avg= 7.55, stdev=10.53
clat (usec): min=172, max=11080, avg=461.92, stdev=137.02
lat (usec): min=178, max=11086, avg=469.86, stdev=138.05
clat percentiles (usec):
| 1.00th=[ 278], 5.00th=[ 318], 10.00th=[ 338], 20.00th=[ 366],
| 30.00th=[ 390], 40.00th=[ 414], 50.00th=[ 438], 60.00th=[ 466],
| 70.00th=[ 494], 80.00th=[ 532], 90.00th=[ 604], 95.00th=[ 716],
| 99.00th=[ 900], 99.50th=[ 980], 99.90th=[ 1336], 99.95th=[ 1704],
| 99.99th=[ 3408]
bw (KB /s): min=119656, max=166680, per=99.93%, avg=148029.21,
stdev=11824.30
lat (usec) : 250=2.71%, 500=77.22%, 750=17.60%, 1000=2.21%
lat (msec) : 2=0.24%, 4=0.02%, 10=0.01%, 20=0.01%
cpu : usr=27.92%, sys=55.44%, ctx=91283, majf=0, minf=7
IO depths : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%,
>=64=0.0%
submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%,
>=64=0.0%
complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%,
>=64=0.0%
issued : total=r=1310044/w=1309348/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0
latency : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=5117.4MB, aggrb=148207KB/s, minb=148207KB/s,
maxb=148207KB/s, mint=35357msec, maxt=35357msec
WRITE: io=5114.7MB, aggrb=148128KB/s, minb=148128KB/s,
maxb=148128KB/s, mint=35357msec, maxt=35357msec
Disk stats (read/write):
vdb: ios=1302512/1301780, merge=0/0, ticks=294828/407184,
in_queue=701380, util=99.51%
In my tests virtio-scsi shows worse results than virtio-blk.
Host kernel 3.19-3, qemu-system-x86_64 -version
QEMU emulator version 2.0.0.
--
WBR
Konstantin V. Krotov
next reply other threads:[~2015-04-15 8:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-15 8:17 Konstantin Krotov [this message]
2015-04-16 1:27 ` [Qemu-devel] virtio-blk and virtio-scsi performance comparison Fam Zheng
2015-04-16 8:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-04-16 11:17 ` Konstantin Krotov
2015-04-16 11:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-04-21 9:53 ` Konstantin Krotov
2015-04-21 9:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=552E1EB4.3030805@clodo.ru \
--to=kkv@clodo.ru \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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.