WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

Re: [Xen-users] Performance issues

To: Guillaume Thouvenin <guillaume.thouvenin@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Performance issues
From: Matt Ayres <matta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 11:18:18 -0400
Cc: Stephan Austermühle <au@xxxxxxx>, xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:18:56 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060412164523.7d228ea3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: TekTonic
References: <443BC41A.6080206@xxxxxxx> <20060412164523.7d228ea3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)


Guillaume Thouvenin wrote:
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:58:34 +0200
Stephan Austermühle <au@xxxxxxx> wrote:

The performance loss is greater than what I have expected. Can anybody
confirm the dimension of the performance loss? Are these values normal
for a Xen setup?

Hello Stephan, hello everybody,

 I also did some performance tests. I put them on a web page so you can
have a look in order to compare with your results. The web page is
still under development and results needs a more accurate analysis but
it can give some hints. Here is the url:

http://www.bullopensource.org/xen/benchs.html



The compile tests are interesting. There is a variable being overlooked by everyone -- the Xen scheduler. The SEDF scheduler is not necessarily the best for every workload. Would you mind re-running the first part of the tests (or all if you have the time), but use the BVT scheduler instead? To set CPU weights you can use the cpu_weight variable in the domain config file (ex. cpu_weight = "2"). libxc/xc_domain.c seems to still use that method for setting the weight. Note it does not use cpu_weight for SEDF. Also, in 3.0.2 you can run "xm sched-sedf domid" to get settings, no need for the external sedf program.

I am running my own tests currently, but I don't create pretty graphs/websites :)

Thank you,
Matt Ayres

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>