From: Daniel Stodden <daniel.stodden@citrix.com>
To: Keith Coleman <list.keith@scaltro.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: windows domU disk performance graph comparing hvm vs stubdom vs pv drivers
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:46:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1266630380.10198.4.camel@agari.van.xensource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5411dbdc1002191650w5930ca51ob01b17739a1130a3@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 19:50 -0500, Keith Coleman wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Daniel Stodden
> <daniel.stodden@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 17:41 -0500, Keith Coleman wrote:
> >
> >> This graph shows the performance under a webserver disk IO workload at
> >> different queue depths. It compares the 4 main IO methods for windows
> >> guests that will be available in the upcoming xen 4.0.0 and 3.4.3
> >> releases: pure HVM, stub domains, gplpv drivers, and xcp winpv
> >> drivers.
> >
> > Cool, thanks. If I may ask, what exactly did you run?
>
> iometer
>
> >> The gplpv and xcp winpv drivers have comparable performance with gplpv
> >> being slightly faster. Both pv drivers are considerably faster than
> >> pure hvm or stub domains. Stub domain performance was about even with
> >> HVM which is lower than we were expecting. We tried a different cpu
> >> pinning in "Stubdom B" with little impact.
> >
> > Is this an SMP dom0? A single guest?
>
> Dual core server with dom0 pinned to core 0 and a single domU pinned
> to core 1. Stubdom was pinned to core 0 then core 1.
I don't see why stubdom would be faster in either configuration. Once
you're through DM emulation, there's plenty of cycles to spend waiting
for I/O completion. So dom0 won't mind spending them on qemu either.
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-20 1:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-19 22:41 windows domU disk performance graph comparing hvm vs stubdom vs pv drivers Keith Coleman
2010-02-20 0:08 ` Daniel Stodden
2010-02-20 0:50 ` Keith Coleman
2010-02-20 1:46 ` Daniel Stodden [this message]
2010-02-22 16:33 ` Stefano Stabellini
2010-02-22 17:14 ` Keith Coleman
2010-02-22 17:27 ` Stefano Stabellini
2010-02-22 21:13 ` Keith Coleman
2010-02-23 13:14 ` Stefano Stabellini
2010-02-23 14:44 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-02-23 19:39 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2010-02-23 20:03 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-02-23 20:47 ` Marco Sinhoreli
2010-02-23 21:06 ` Keith Coleman
2010-02-23 20:11 ` Keith Coleman
2010-02-23 19:38 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
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=1266630380.10198.4.camel@agari.van.xensource.com \
--to=daniel.stodden@citrix.com \
--cc=list.keith@scaltro.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).