From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1CPLhW-0003Cg-0y for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 06:01:26 -0800 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CPLhU-00080C-Ug for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 06:01:25 -0800 Received: from root by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CPLhS-0000xM-00 for ; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:01:22 +0100 Received: from naked.iki.fi ([62.142.249.112]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:01:22 +0100 Received: from naked by naked.iki.fi with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:01:22 +0100 From: Nuutti Kotivuori Message-ID: <87pt2v9jl1.fsf@aka.i.naked.iki.fi> References: <417101F4.1050109@fastwebnet.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [uml-devel] Re: [uml-user] UML Guests and CPU Performance. Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 14:56:58 +0200 To: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net primero@fastwebnet.it wrote: > It seems to me that performance of UML Guest machine is sensibly > worst then UML Host ... even if there is only one UML guest and no > other processes sucking resources. It is definitely worse. > The Bogomips of the Guest are the half of the Host Ignore bogomips. Pure CPU workload is really close to the host. You can try it with any CPU tester application. > and compiling time is almost the double. We have generally measured compile time increase by a third or more. It is affected by many things though, so YMMV. This is with the skas patch, but without SYSEMU. > I want to know if this is "Normal" or i have to look for some errors > in my configuration. Sounds just about right - for some not-so-independent results on UML performance compared to other techniques, I found the Xen performance results to give a rough guideline: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/performance.html Do note that the benchmarks they run are really bad on virtualization techniques - normal user workload suffers far less. -- Naked ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel