Re: [Xen-devel] VM memory allocation speed with cs 26056

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 12.11.12 at 16:01, Zhigang Wang <zhigang.x.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> My conclusion from the test:
> 
>   - HVM create time is greatly reduced.
>   - PVM create time is increased dramatically for 4G, 8G, 16G, 32G, 64G, 128G.
>   - HVM/PVM destroy time is not affected.
>   - If most of our customers are using PVM, I think this patch is bad: because
> most VM memory should under 128G.
>   - If they are using HVM, then this patch is great.
> 
> Questions for discussion:
> 
>   - Did you get the same result?
>   - It seems this result is not ideal. We may need to improve it.

We'd first of all need to understand how this rather odd behavior
can be explained. In order to have a better comparison basis, did
you also do this for traditional PV? Or maybe I misunderstand
what PVM stands for, and am mixing it up with PVH? You certainly
agree that the two curves for what you call PVM have quite
unusual a relationship.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel