| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] Xen Performance
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
|
|
|
| |
|
Home