This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] RE: Writing to a ramdisk in a PV domain is SLLLOOOWWW?!?

To: "Xen-Devel (xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] RE: Writing to a ramdisk in a PV domain is SLLLOOOWWW?!?
From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 13:16:31 -0700 (PDT)
Delivery-date: Wed, 05 May 2010 13:18:12 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <89f1cead-b77d-4294-ab12-5e05344ed346@default>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <89f1cead-b77d-4294-ab12-5e05344ed346@default>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
It appears that ramswap is bad for HV domains also.
On one run:

real    11m38.017s
user    0m6.696s
sys     0m27.865s

I tried on bare-metal Linux and there is a
similar pattern but not nearly as bad:

real    0m54.978s
user    0m8.577s
sys     0m3.094s

Maybe there is some horrible TLB thrashing going
on even on bare-metal that is made even worse by

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Magenheimer
> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 12:14 PM
> To: Xen-Devel (xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
> Subject: Writing to a ramdisk in a PV domain is SLLLOOOWWW?!?
> Has anyone tried using a ramdisk in a PV domain?
> I'm trying it in an experiment to compare swapping to
> a ramdisk against tmem (frontswap) performance
> (suggested as a performance test on lkml).
> Writing to the ramdisk appears to be VERY VERY slow,
> elapsed time in the guest is several times larger than
> user+sys, and xentop shows the guest consuming vcpu
> seconds at about the user+sys rate.  Note that
> this is when tmem is turned off and there is no
> vhd swap disk configured.
> I'm suspecting that writing to ramdisk must be causing
> some interesting/expensive PV pagetable behavior?
> Or maybe somehow /dev/ram0 is getting routed through
> qemu?  Or ??
> Thanks,
> Dan
> P.S. Yes, I realize a ramdisk has no real value in
> a guest... this is just a performance experiment.

Xen-devel mailing list