Re: [Xen-users] Xen Performance

[Peter Booth <peter_booth@xxxxxxx>]

The 8% is a dangerous over-simplification, and represents simply the  
results of a particular well-designed study.
 Clearly there are situations where the overhead of using Xen is much  
higher than this.
On May 24, 2009, at 6:12 AM, Amir Maqbool Ahmed wrote:

> Hi
>
> I am a student at the University College of Oslo and have in one  
> experiment
> tried to test the performance of Xenolinux compared to Native linux  
> on Debian lenny
> 2.6.26-2 kernel.
>
> bonnie++ the disk IO bechmark program was used among other tests  
> like cpu intensive scripts.
> The goal is to prove the statement (Once again) that Xen adds only  
> an overhead of maximum 8%.
> The Results of bonnie++ have been surprizing and I want to explain  
> them.
> It shows that for some types of Disk IO, like sequential delete and  
> random create
> Xen performs faster than native linux. A full comparison chart is  
> attached as a pdf.
> The test are run first from native linux than both from Dom0 and a  
> DomU with the same results.
> Can you please help me understand these results, How can Xenolinux  
> perform faster
> although only for some types of operations, then native linux?
>
> Plese forgive me If Im missing something completely obvious.
> If you need any further info. please just send me an email and it  
> will be provided.
> Hope to hear from you soon
>
> Amir Ahmed
> <io-graph.pdf>_______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

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