WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-users] Xen Performance

To: Fasiha Ashraf <feehapk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-users] Xen Performance
From: Grant McWilliams <grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:58:44 -0700
Cc: xen <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:59:33 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=jlSAU7E972R92mqnnrDQJ6p1cdIYgYzgQ9CpdA6yl+o=; b=FrrRdfo/LivqopZtj6BBD9yj+Vt5b2MtkLpzwitMwLnBDxXiuuaTOyoQNR3zCIigvi ddxgjUbdvCgbMoWviLCyKhgbmxvDvaM9BKdPCyfJSE0pNGdDWAZ9sif9IO49WzwZQ0OQ P5J6ypFUqjln+BfnBFC3dZ1VxmNtu1iI43m2Y=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=kaoUY58i9ISBq2KFsv6L+1E3bwFbWUp5eIDitu94jTu1FMjXnP694+TxBg24wCJr3V K9/LCrjleBnpCmGnXmjyK1l/3/63sZp4h0EqtdixWruUvIjezVDFBkuiI8bAp6xZMLM1 m/O483AKOBekRYZnnCKxqpc2+0hgYAzEWr8Eo=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <269159.95355.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <ed123fa30910121917v48d3fef3rd06ef86d090efc15@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <269159.95355.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Fasiha Ashraf <feehapk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am facing the same issue. Bridging (the default mode) is better and simple way for network set-up. But the strange thing in my case is i don't find this virbro while running ifconfig in my dom0. instead i have peth0 acting as vif for dom0.

Is there any issue with building xen with pv kernel, while using FC11 platform where virtualization is enabled? since i compiled and build xen using a platform where i have enabled virtualization at fc11 installation time.
McWilliams! i have tested domU <-> domU throughput using netperf-2.4.5 and got a throughput of 0.29Mbps. that is no doubt very poor. Marco observe the same throughput in this case and identified that its because Netperf use setitimer() to send packets at fixed rate. Sending packets at fixed rate is the cause of this poor throughput. I dont know yet how to improve it?

Regards,
Fasiha Ashraf

It isn't just tests like netperf... If you copy a file via rcp from DomU to Dom0 you will get two times the performance as from DomU to DomU. That's why i was wondering abotu his testing methodology. If you assign a nic to each DomU so the traffic leaves the physical machine, goes through a switch and comes back it's faster than DomU to DomU. There's been long discussions as to why. I've not re-run my tests with 3.4.1 so I don't know if that was fixed.

Grant McWilliams
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>