[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-users] Xen Performance


  • To: "Fajar A. Nugraha" <fajar@xxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Grant McWilliams <grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:06:54 -0700
  • Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:07:59 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=DMNJO2Ix5hqT2OExBROL6mkmh1eRaRu84rT0gzg5yx2watnmJBPFvU9edNWVnseN6W eNrY1F3njKwTXjy2O7dayUje6knx9tfXrUmFyk26WH6RLsOKi+dmloxelor+P1V0yjZ3 KDGFYo72Fq1pwlr6YQgGnNTB4Wu/u3oGBZj3A=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>


On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Fajar A. Nugraha <fajar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Grant McWilliams
<grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> CentOS 5.4? If my time machine worked :-) . I'm already running CentOS 5.3
> with Gitco's Xen 3.4.1.
>
> Here's another system: CentOS 5.3 Dom0, CentOS 5.3 DomUs on a Dual Core Duo
> Xeon system (2.8ghz)
>
> DomU to DomU -Â 1.93 Gbits/sec
> DomU to Dom0 -Â 2.76 Gbit/sec
> Dom0 to DomU -Â 193 Mbits/sec

Ah ... so domU <-> domU is working FINE, right? That is similar with
the results I get :

It isn't working fine. I said at the end of my message that the numbers aren't quite right because I didn't post both halves of the bidirectional test. The second half is 1/4 the speed of the first.

Can you post the whole bidirectional test for DomU to DomU like the one below? As soon as I get my Virtual Server back up I'll post full numbers. I didn't realize until the end of the test that I was only recording one direction. The reverse direction numbers are 1/4 the speed. Anyway I'll do more comprehensive testing.

Â
As for dom0 -> domU performance, it is indeed lower, and I'm not sure
why. In my case it's still usable though (about 600-800 Mbps), since I
don't run any service on dom0 that is used by domU. Here's my dom0 <->
domU result.

# iperf -c 192.168.122.1 -r
------------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.122.1, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ Â5] local 192.168.122.49 port 52890 connected with 192.168.122.1 port 5001
[ ID] Interval    Transfer   Bandwidth
[ Â5] Â0.0-10.0 sec Â2.72 GBytes Â2.34 Gbits/sec
[ Â4] local 192.168.122.49 port 5001 connected with 192.168.122.1 port 16809
[ ID] Interval    Transfer   Bandwidth
[ Â4] Â0.0-10.0 sec  Â747 MBytes  Â627 Mbits/sec
Â

192.168.122.1 -> dom0's virbr0, running RHEL5.4 64bit,
kernel-xen-2.6.18-164.2.1.el5, Xen 3.4.1.
192.168.122.49 -> domU, kernel-xen-2.6.18-164.2.1.el5

I'm not sure why your dom0 -> domU is about 3 times slower than mine.
Perhaps newer kernel version matters.

--
Fajar

Â

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

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.