[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-users] redhat native vs. redhat on XCP
- To: xenList <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Henrik Andersson <henrik.j.andersson@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 22:31:32 +0200
- Delivery-date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:32:30 -0800
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=lrLywOyhl5HcH1/RZHeD0b5ocvrLcEx03zTdgVjH9bNPKoPjXTQmeQ+ZoV6HiQJAT6 s1mt9aibn4H3A+q2Id+RjDhdjj/TwSN+EBDKbRi+CHnDp2Rh33FdCV6YIkMB5k0yD3Ov SBza3IOv2h8vvUdDsw3xJ71oAA5Yb59hncfFU=
- List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
I don't know what he means but he states, and I quote: "We'll test a java web application (online banking), and we basically
want to see which environment will process more TPS (transactions per
second), which is directly related to disk I/O."
To me he's benchmarking native RHEL5 against virtualized RHEL5, same way one could benchmark RHEL5 against Ubuntu or Solaris. Maybe he will tell us what he meant by that and to be honest, I might understand him incorrectly because of my english.
-Henrik Andersson
On 12 January 2011 22:21, Digimer <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 01/12/2011 03:17 PM, Henrik Andersson wrote:
> What makes you think that adding a virtualization layer to the picture
> would increase the performance? Would be bit odd to have same operating
> system perform better when it is run on a virtual machine.
>
> -Henrik Andersson
I would suspect that OP is trying to asses whether the performance hit
would be significant enough to outweigh the benefits of virtualization.
--
Digimer
E-Mail: digimer@xxxxxxxxxxx
AN!Whitepapers: http://alteeve.com
Node Assassin: http://nodeassassin.org
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
