xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergey Zhukov <svg@ngs.ru>
To: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Forking time in Xen
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:39 +0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1340012319.13742.114.camel@sergey> (raw)

Hi,

I repost this message from xen-users list following by others
subscribers suggestions:


I found an article about forking time for redis NoSQL database in
different systems:

http://redis.io/topics/latency
---------Quote------------------
Fork time in different systems
Modern hardware is pretty fast to copy the page table, but Xen is not.
The problem with Xen is not virtualization-specific, but Xen-specific.
For instance using VMware or Virutal Box does not result into slow fork
time. The following is a table that compares fork time for different
Redis instance size. Data is obtained performing a BGSAVE and looking at
the latest_fork_usec filed in the INFO command output.

      * Linux beefy VM on VMware 6.0GB RSS forked in 77 milliseconds
        (12.8 milliseconds per GB).
      * Linux running on physical machine (Unknown HW) 6.1GB RSS forked
        in 80 milliseconds (13.1 milliseconds per GB)
      * Linux running on physical machine (Xeon @ 2.27Ghz) 6.9GB RSS
        forked into 62 millisecodns (9 milliseconds per GB).
      * Linux VM on 6sync (KVM) 360 MB RSS forked in 8.2 milliseconds
        (23.3 millisecond per GB).
      * Linux VM on EC2 (Xen) 6.1GB RSS forked in 1460 milliseconds
        (239.3 milliseconds per GB).
      * Linux VM on Linode (Xen) 0.9GBRSS forked into 382 millisecodns
        (424 milliseconds per GB).

As you can see a VM running on Xen has a performance hit that is between
one order to two orders of magnitude. We believe this is a severe
problem with Xen and we hope it will be addressed ASAP.
----------End of quote-----------------

I made my own test with Xen 4.1 and Redis 2.4 with 7.04GB dataset. The
test was performed on Intel Core I5 2500 processor unit. Forking time
was about 1 sec or 151 ms/GB - it's faster then tests over Amazon
EC2/Linode were mentioned in the article, but still much slower then
VMWare or physical machines. Has anyone running with this issue? Or may
be there is a way to tune Xen for less forking times?

Sergey Zhukov

             reply	other threads:[~2012-06-18  9:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-18  9:38 Sergey Zhukov [this message]
2012-06-18 10:38 ` Forking time in Xen George Dunlap
2012-06-18 11:35 ` 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=1340012319.13742.114.camel@sergey \
    --to=svg@ngs.ru \
    --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 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).