[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] DomU vs Dom0 performance.
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 07:22:14PM -0400, sushrut shirole wrote: > Hi, > > I have been doing some diskIO bench-marking of dom0 and domU (HVM). I ran > into an issue where domU > performed better than dom0. So I ran few experiments to check if it is > just diskIO performance. > > I have an archlinux (kernel 3.5.0) + xen 4.2.2) installed on a Intel Core > i7 Q720 machine. I have also installed > archlinux (kernel 3.5.0) in domU running on this machine. The domU runs > with 8 vcpus. I have alloted both dom0 > and domu 4096M ram. What kind of guest is it ? PV or HVM? > > I performed following experiments to compare the performance of domU vs > dom0. > > experiment 1] > > 1. Created a file.img of 5G > 2. Mounted the file with ext2 filesystem. > 3. Ran sysbench with following command. > > sysbench --num-threads=8 --test=fileio --file-total-size=1G > --max-requests=1000000 prepare > > 4. Read files into memory > > script to read files > > <snip> > for i in `ls test_file.*` > do > sudo dd if=./$i of=/dev/zero > done > </snip> > > 5. Ran sysbench. > > sysbench --num-threads=8 --test=fileio --file-total-size=1G > --max-requests=5000000 --file-test-mode=rndrd run > > the output i got on dom0 is > > <output> > Number of threads: 8 > > Extra file open flags: 0 > 128 files, 8Mb each > 1Gb total file size > Block size 16Kb > Number of random requests for random IO: 5000000 > Read/Write ratio for combined random IO test: 1.50 > Periodic FSYNC enabled, calling fsync() each 100 requests. > Calling fsync() at the end of test, Enabled. > Using synchronous I/O mode > Doing random read test > > Operations performed: 5130322 Read, 0 Write, 0 Other = 5130322 Total > Read 78.283Gb Written 0b Total transferred 78.283Gb (4.3971Gb/sec) > *288165.68 Requests/sec executed* > > Test execution summary: > total time: 17.8034s > total number of events: 5130322 > total time taken by event execution: 125.3102 > per-request statistics: > min: 0.01ms > avg: 0.02ms > max: 55.55ms > approx. 95 percentile: 0.02ms > > Threads fairness: > events (avg/stddev): 641290.2500/10057.89 > execution time (avg/stddev): 15.6638/0.02 > </output> > > 6. Performed same experiment on domU and result I got is > > <output> > Number of threads: 8 > > Extra file open flags: 0 > 128 files, 8Mb each > 1Gb total file size > Block size 16Kb > Number of random requests for random IO: 5000000 > Read/Write ratio for combined random IO test: 1.50 > Periodic FSYNC enabled, calling fsync() each 100 requests. > Calling fsync() at the end of test, Enabled. > Using synchronous I/O mode > Doing random read test > > Operations performed: 5221490 Read, 0 Write, 0 Other = 5221490 Total > Read 79.674Gb Written 0b Total transferred 79.674Gb (5.9889Gb/sec) > *392489.34 Requests/sec executed* > > Test execution summary: > total time: 13.3035s > total number of events: 5221490 > total time taken by event execution: 98.7121 > per-request statistics: > min: 0.01ms > avg: 0.02ms > max: 49.75ms > approx. 95 percentile: 0.02ms > > Threads fairness: > events (avg/stddev): 652686.2500/1494.93 > execution time (avg/stddev): 12.3390/0.02 > > </output> > > I was expecting dom0 to performa better than domU, so to debug more into it > I ram lm_bench microbenchmarks. > > Experiment 2] bw_mem benchmark > > 1. ./bw_mem 1000m wr > > dom0 output: > > 1048.58 3640.60 > > domU output: > > 1048.58 4719.32 > > 2. ./bw_mem 1000m rd > > dom0 output: > 1048.58 5780.56 > > domU output: > > 1048.58 6258.32 > > > Experiment 3] lat_syscall benchmark > > 1. ./lat_syscall write > > dom0 output: > Simple write: 1.9659 microseconds > > domU output : > Simple write: 0.4256 microseconds > > 2. ./lat_syscall read > > dom0 output: > Simple read: 1.9399 microseconds > > domU output : > Simple read: 0.3764 microseconds > > 3. ./lat_syscall stat > > dom0 output: > Simple stat:3.9667 microseconds > > domU output : > Simple stat: 1.2711 microseconds > > I am not able to understand why domU has performed better than domU, when > obvious guess is that dom0 > should perform better than domU. I would really appreciate an help if > anyone knows the reason behind this > issue. > > Thank you, > Sushrut. > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |