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-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Copy-on-write memory to allow many more xenU domains per

To: Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Copy-on-write memory to allow many more xenU domains per machine
From: Michael Vrable <mvrable@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:19:55 -0700
Delivery-date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:29:22 +0100
Envelope-to: steven.hand@xxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <E1CMXEA-000212-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx on Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 08:43:30PM +0100
List-archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=xen-devel>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-id: List for Xen developers <xen-devel.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
Mail-followup-to: Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20041026113042.C27518@xxxxxxxxxxx> <E1CMXEA-000212-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 08:43:30PM +0100, Ian Pratt wrote:
> > "Memory Resource Management in VMware ESX Server" by Carl Waldspurger
> > has some numbers on memory sharing between VMs:
> >     http://www.usenix.org/events/osdi02/tech/waldspurger/waldspurger.pdf
> > (This paper is also cited in the Xen SOSP 2003 paper.)
> > 
> > Sharing between identical machines is good, though sharing between
> > dissimilar machines is not as high as I remembered (copy-on-write
> > sharing is able to save around 7-30% of memory in real-world testing).
> 
> As I recall, Carl's results were on Windows, which might explain
> why I was seeing rather less. Linux resident set sizes tend to be
> smaller, and there's generally rather more diversity in the
> install base (at least around here).

Both were tested in that paper; Windows was at the high end of the scale
and Linux at the low end:

Reproducing Figure 5 from the paper in slightly abbreviated form:

          Guests        % Shared        % Reclaimed
        10 x WinNT        42.9              32.9
         9 x Linux        29.2              18.7
         5 x Linux        10.0               7.2

"% Shared" is the fraction of pages which are shared; "% Reclaimed"
measures how much memory sharing the pages is able to save.

Three systems is still a limited test set.

--Michael Vrable


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE
LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel