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

Re: [Xen-devel] windows domU disk performance graph comparing hvm vs st

To: Keith Coleman <list.keith@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] windows domU disk performance graph comparing hvm vs stubdom vs pv drivers
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:27:19 +0000
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:29:45 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5411dbdc1002220914m2cf15fack76aed42a4fca1a32@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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: <5411dbdc1002191441q4becdba9o61168bc986533e6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002221516330.2037@kaball-desktop> <5411dbdc1002220914m2cf15fack76aed42a4fca1a32@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Keith Coleman wrote:
> On 2/22/10, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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
> 

That is strange because in that configuration I get a far better
disk bandwidth with stubdoms compared to qemu running in dom0.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>