Re: [Xen-users] High Oracle overhead with Xen 4.1.2

[AP <apxeng@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Florian Heigl <florian.heigl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> questions:
>
> Guest OS: CentOS 5.6 (Linux 2.6.18-238.el5) with 12 GB memory and 4 vcpus
> Is it  2.6.18-238.el5 or  2.6.18-238.el5xen?

It was 2.6.18-238.el5. Should I be running with el5xen?

> Can you try to do a cpu pinning for all vcpus onto real cpus?

Pinning CPUs did not make much of a difference.

> Florian
>
> 2012/3/16 AP <apxeng@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> I am trying to move a workload from bare metal on to a Xen VM. Prior
>> to doing that I decided to do some performance benchmarks using
>> Hammerora (http://hammerora.sourceforge.net/).
>> The following is the details of the configuration/results of an
>> experiment to determine the overhead of XEN. The tests were run on the
>> same hardware. I am seeing a high overhead with Xen. I realize there
>> will be a IO penalty so I moved all the redo logs in to memory. I do
>> understand there will be a VM scheduling penalty with Xen but should
>> it be in the 30-40% range? Does anyone have any insight in to this?
>
> Florian
>
>
> --
> the purpose of libvirt is to provide an abstraction layer hiding all
> xen features added since 2006 until they were finally understood and
> copied by the kvm devs.

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