From: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com>
To: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Colour me impressed: 2.6.25, kvm-69, virtio_net
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:51:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200806041451.12825.fjwcash@gmail.com> (raw)
We've been using Xen 3.0 for the past 18-ish months on a couple boxes here
and were quite impressed with it, especially when using the xen-tools
package on Debian. But, it couldn't run FreeBSD or Windows guests on our
existing hardware, so we bought shiny new Opteron 2000-series systems
with SVM support. And then the problems began.
Xen 3.1/3.2 broke too many things for us (especially in the network
setup), and we could not get a stable, working, reliable dom0 let alone
any domUs. Mainly due to our hardware requiring a newer Linux kernel
than 2.6.18 (RAID controller and NIC weren't supported until 2.6.20).
So we started testing KVM, originally with kvm-60 and kernel 2.6.22 on
Debian Lenny. Since then, we've moved to kernel 2.6.24 and 2.6.25, along
with kvm-69. We've been running Windows XP, FreeBSD, and Debian guests
for the past few months with very few problems.
Today, I managed to get a couple Linux guests to load using the virtio
drivers in kernel 2.6.25. Colour me impressed!
I thought the emulated e1000 interface had good performance: the network
throughput of virtio_net (as tested using iperf) is wire-speed. I was
able to saturate a gigabit link using iperf from a guest running with
virtio_net! Average throughput was 860+ Mbps, with highs around 980
Mbps.
That, combined with how easy it is to manage kvm (I wrote my own
management scripts and config file format that is a lot easier to read
than the Xen ones), configure networking in the host (done using the
distro tools, not some arcane python scripts), and get hardware driver
support in the host (standard distro kernels, not ancient xen-specific
ones), makes it very hard to find reasons to run Xen. The only reason I
can find, is if you have hardware that doesn't support VMX/SVM, but is
supported by kernel 2.6.18, in which case Xen 3.0 works quite nicely (not
3.1 or later).
Kudos to the kvm devs, the kernel devs, the qemu devs, and the rest who
are involved in making KVM work so well!
For those interested, I've put some iperf results into the KVM Wiki
(http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Using_VirtIO_NIC), along with info on
the management scripts/config file format I use
(http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/HowToConfigScript).
Now, if only the FreeBSD port of KVM could be completed, so we could use
ZFS in the host instead of LVM. ;)
--
Freddie Cash
fjwcash@gmail.com
next reply other threads:[~2008-06-04 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-04 21:51 Freddie Cash [this message]
2008-06-04 22:48 ` Colour me impressed: 2.6.25, kvm-69, virtio_net Alberto Treviño
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=200806041451.12825.fjwcash@gmail.com \
--to=fjwcash@gmail.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox