From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keith Coleman Subject: Re: windows domU disk performance graph comparing hvm vs stubdom vs pv drivers Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:50:30 -0500 Message-ID: <5411dbdc1002191650w5930ca51ob01b17739a1130a3@mail.gmail.com> References: <5411dbdc1002191441q4becdba9o61168bc986533e6@mail.gmail.com> <1266624516.1653.2964.camel@agari.van.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1266624516.1653.2964.camel@agari.van.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Daniel Stodden Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Daniel Stodden 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. Keith Coleman