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/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-users] Xen Performance

To: "Fajar A. Nugraha" <fajar@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Xen Performance
From: Grant McWilliams <grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 03:02:12 -0700
Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 03:04:09 -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=vHnOOcLeESrpyjBW9yUr1np/2ZG7rcvEaJenmTonyqo=; b=epl8bMT4V3FfcMQQGmG7G+V9hLqqoYIE2Uu1HJMNmjBHkQLR6tdxLMMfSJkYpULj1a /PYbGC/nwOBPhcufw1o0lMpYJOABGhqsLbrHkIl0yP8d4IJZwzr27RzZw7DrHtktzEQW humfvABixZIYWHYGKr1XEIM0mGoPyOQaaFuYw=
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=H/6D9IKNqfvMZWvioMEehvmyuqUmWQzSTs5o0EE3Z69pDa+RqRuWHY758GtZkFTmVc Q8adcvr09FWSNc1ZYSwAXwj0zuXHPbnPTDdA6fOR1BjaVBZaUsUF8hFe7LWc04YzgKrF /gc9UEZY2KKSQ4J+BYJAL1N8fCkFYkbD2rI7w=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <7207d96f0910140219k3de594f7mfcd7dbea9aff7c58@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <713143895.20091010125310@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7207d96f0910121900r183dfe7bv75ee3fbeb33aa716@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ed123fa30910121917v48d3fef3rd06ef86d090efc15@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7207d96f0910130008t5e6d81b7x89afb027d1489999@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ed123fa30910130105v28545580g48a3bad26c774d5c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7207d96f0910130506l4887cdcdp9858c01685635d80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ed123fa30910131054w53661924ga62bea6262d87392@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7207d96f0910132318m1561766cvdff28966154161f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ed123fa30910140006w60ffadd3mc646162c1f77bde3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7207d96f0910140219k3de594f7mfcd7dbea9aff7c58@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Fajar A. Nugraha <fajar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Grant McWilliams
<grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Fajar A. Nugraha <fajar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Grant McWilliams
>> <grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> > DomU to DomU -  1.93 Gbits/sec

>> Ah ... so domU <-> domU is working FINE, right? That is similar with
>> the results I get :
> It isn't working fine. I said at the end of my message that the numbers
> aren't quite right because I didn't post both halves of the bidirectional
> test. The second half is 1/4 the speed of the first.

I posted the result for self-compiled 2.6.29-xen domU in my second
mail on this thread (I got around 1-2 Gbps). Here's one for domU with
RHEL's kernel-xen-2.6.18-164.2.1.el5 (same dom0):

# iperf -c -r
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
Client connecting to, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
[  5] local port 64178 connected with port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  5]  0.0-10.0 sec  2.57 GBytes  2.21 Gbits/sec
[  4] local port 5001 connected with port 45773
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  4]  0.0-10.0 sec  2.66 GBytes  2.29 Gbits/sec


Looks like the Redhat kernel is faster for return trip tests.. Identical speed both ways.

Grant McWilliams
Xen-users mailing list
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>