Hi,
r358848 has been MFC'd to stable/12
Zitat von Harry Schmalzbauer <free...@omnilan.de>:
Am 22.10.2018 um 13:26 schrieb Harry Schmalzbauer:
…
Test-Runs:
Each hypervisor had only the one bench-guest running, no other
tasks/guests were running besides system's native standard processes.
Since the time between powering up the guest and finishing logon
differed notably (~5s vs. ~20s) from one host to the other, I did a
quick synthetic IO-Test beforehand.
I'm using IOmeter since heise.de published a great test pattern
called IOmix – about 18 years ago I guess. This access pattern has
always perfectly reflected the system performance for human
computer usage with non-caculation-centric applications, and still
is my favourite, despite throughput and latency changed by some
orders of manitudes during the last decade (and I had defined
something for "fio" which mimics IOmix and shows reasonable
relational results; but I'm still prefering IOmeter for homogenous
IO benchmarking).
The results is about factor 7 :-(
~3800iops&69MB/s (CPU-guest-usage 42%IOmeter+12%irq)
vs.
~29000iops&530MB/s (CPU-guest-usage 11%IOmeter+19%irq)
[with debug kernel and debug-malloc, numbers are 3000iops&56MB/s,
virtio-blk instead of ahci,hd: results in 5660iops&104MB/s
with non-debug kernel
– much better, but even higher CPU load and still factor 4 slower]
What I don't understand is, why the IOmeter process differs that
much in CPU utilization!?! It's the same binary on the same OS
(guest) with the same OS-driver and the same underlying hardware –
"just" the AHCI emulation and the vmm differ...
I repeated this test with a slightly different device backend
(Samsung 850pro SSD on mps(4) instead of mfid(4)).
After applying r358848 to stable/12, the numbers changed
dramatically.0 on the same haswell based Xeon E3 platform.
With the single SSD, the IOmeter numbers for ESXi as host drop
from ~29000iops&530MB/s to ~11000/205MB/s.
But the numbers for bhyve as host
raise from ~3800iops&69MB/s to ~8800/160MB/s at the same time!!!
So there's still a penalty of ~20% for ahci-bhyve vs. ahci-esx, but
this is a enourmous improvement.
Please don't skip the MFC for r358848!
Thanks a lot for all the work!
-harry
_______________________________________________
freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-virtualization-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Gruß
---
Michael Reifenberger
_______________________________________________
freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-virtualization-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
