xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support
George Dunlap wrote:
Andre Przywara wrote:
BTW: Shouldn't we set finally numa=on as the default value?
Is there any data to support the idea that this helps significantly on
common systems?
I did some tests on an 8 node machine. I will retry this later on
4-nodes and 2-nodes systems, but I assume similar numbers. I used
multiple guests in parallel each running bw_mem of lmbench, which is
admittedly quite NUMA sensitive. I cannot publish real numbers (yet?),
but the results were dramatic:
with numa=on I got the same results for each guest (the same as the
native result) when the number of guests was smaller or equal the number
of nodes (since each guest got it's own memory controller).
If I disabled NUMA aware placement by explicitly specifying cpus="0-31"
in the config file or booted with numa=off, the values dropped down by
factor 3-5 (!) (even for a few guests) with some variance due to the
random nature of core to memory mapping.
Overcommitting the nodes (letting multiple guests use each node) lowered
the values to about 80% for two guests and 60% for three guests per
node, but it never got anywhere close to the numa=off values.
So these results encourage me again to opt for numa=on as the default value.
Keir, I will check if dropping the node containment in the CPU
overcommitment case is an option, but what would be the right strategy
in that case?
Warn the user?
Don't contain at all?
Contain to more than onde node?
Regards,
Andre.
--
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 448 3567 12
----to satisfy European Law for business letters:
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Karl-Hammerschmidt-Str. 34, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Andrew Bowd; Thomas M. McCoy; Giuliano Meroni
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, (continued)
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Juergen Gross
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, George Dunlap
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Andre Przywara
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, George Dunlap
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Andre Przywara
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Dulloor
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Andre Przywara
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support,
Andre Przywara <=
- RE: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Ian Pratt
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Ian Pratt
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, George Dunlap
- RE: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Ian Pratt
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Ian Pratt
- Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Jan Beulich
- RE: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.4.1 NUMA support, Ian Pratt
|
|
|