Re: Xen Performance
2009-06-01 02:37:37 GMT
Luke, Apologies for my first incomplete reply. Here's more context. The VMs weren't page scanning. They did show non- trivial %steal (where non-trivial is > 1%) These VMs are commercially hosted on five quad core hosts with approx 14 VMs per host and just under 1GB RAM per VM. Thats not a lot of memory, but then the workload of one nginx and three mongrels per VM is comfortably under 512MB of RSS. I have heard numerous mentions of similar behavior from users of other utility platforms . There is a recent (Feb 2009) report by IBM that also describes this behavior once #domU exceeds six. My point, however, is that Xen performance is not well understood in general, and there are situations where virtualization doesnt perform well. Peter On May 30, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Peter Booth wrote: > In this example, swapping/page scanning was not an issue. > > On May 30, 2009, at 4:05 PM, Luke S Crawford wrote: > >> Peter Booth <peter_booth <at> mac.com> writes: >>> One real world example: >>> native Linux: page response times of ( 400ms/150ms)(Continue reading)
RSS Feed