From: Keith Coleman <list.keith@scaltro.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.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: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:14:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5411dbdc1002220914m2cf15fack76aed42a4fca1a32@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002221516330.2037@kaball-desktop>
On 2/22/10, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Keith Coleman wrote:
>> I am posting this to xen-devel instead of -users because it paints an
>> incomplete picture that shouldn't be the basis for deciding how to run
>> production systems.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>
> What disk backend are you using?
phy, LV
Keith Coleman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-22 17:14 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
2010-02-22 16:33 ` Stefano Stabellini
2010-02-22 17:14 ` Keith Coleman [this message]
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=5411dbdc1002220914m2cf15fack76aed42a4fca1a32@mail.gmail.com \
--to=list.keith@scaltro.com \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.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).