My apologies. The vdisk was a zfs file. I started setting a domain up with just a zfs zvol as the backend store not long ago with the intent of testing and comparing the performance between a zvol and file. As you've already stated, I expect performance to be better with the zvol.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Balenzano [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 10:21 AM > To: Miller, Vincent (Rick) > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ldoms-discuss] T5120 Ldom Network Performance > > I am a bit confused. Is your vdidsk a ZFS file ? Before you > assign a physical LUN to the LDom, try using a ZFS zvol as > the backend, the performance may be good enough. With that > said, a physical LUN exported to the LDom will give you > better performance. > > Miller, Vincent (Rick) wrote: > > I thought I would provide some more information related to > the below > > email... > > > > After some exhaustive tests, I have identified the problem was not > > really network performance. It was moreso disk overhead related to > > the use of a zfs backend store. > > > > As I understand it, the process of copying the file > involved reading > > from network in primary. The guest domain then reads the data from > > its vnet and writes to its filesystem. This, in turn, > writes to the > > guest's vdisk. This write to the vdisk is then written to > the primary > > domain as another copy operation. All of this occurrs prior to the > > physical write to the disk happens. The issue is > compounded when the > > backend store is a file, as it is with zfs, instead of a device. > > > > In conclusion, I suppose that using a zfs backend store > with LDoms is > > simply not an optimal solution. I will likely reconfigure > the system > > to eliminate the zfs backend store in favor of a hardware RAID. > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Miller, Vincent (Rick) > >> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 2:27 PM > >> To: '[email protected]' > >> Subject: T5120 Ldom Network Performance > >> > >> Hello all, > >> > >> I am hoping that I can gain an understanding based on some > things I > >> have been trying to do. > >> > >> I have a T5120 w/ Solaris 10 10/09 with the latest > available firmware > >> updates applied. Before installing and enabling LDoms 1.3, I get > >> respectable transfer rates over the e1000g interfaces (about 2 > >> minutes to transfer a 4GB file) over Gig-E. However, after > >> installing LDoms and creating the services within the > control domain, > >> then creating a guest LDom, I attempt to transfer the same > 4GB file > >> and now it takes 8 - 10 mins to transfer. I have a pretty typical > >> configuration, at least compared to the Sun/Oracle docs for the > >> software. > >> > >> The OS indicates, through dladm, that the link is up at > 1000fdx. The > >> switch on the other end of the link indicates the same. However, > >> upon visual inspection, the e1000g0 link on the rear of > the server is > >> orange, when I expect green. > >> Seems to indicate a less than optimal link. > >> > >> In reviewing the release notes for LDoms 1.3, I found a > known issue > >> identified as Bug ID 6486234. That seems to indicate that network > >> performance on T2 systems is considerably worse than on > systems where > >> LDoms > >> 1.3 is not configured. In fact, this bug seems to be > referenced in > >> the release notes for several releases. The release notes > go on to > >> explain that a workaround is to "assign a Network Interface Unit > >> (NIU) to the logical domain". > >> > >> Ok. Great...I'll try that. Except the instructions I found to > >> accomplish this task seem to indicate that the on-board e1000g > >> interfaces are not NIU capable interfaces, thus requiring the > >> addition of a PCI network card. I gleaned this information from > >> http://blogs.sun.com/raghuram/entry/niu_hybrid_i_o. which states, > >> specirfically: > >> > >> "NIU has support for 2 ports. Both T5120 and T5220 have two slots > >> for NIU, that is one slot for each port. The XAUI adapters > need to be > >> installed in order gain access to the NIU ports." > >> > >> Additionally, if I configure the e1000g interface to support the > >> hybrid mode anyway, it simply does not have an impact on > performance. > >> > >> I guess what I am asking is if my assumptions are correct. > >> Is it generally accepted that network performance within a LDom > >> system will be poor? To correct this, is it the case that I would > >> need to install a NIU-capable NIC? > >> > >> -- > >> Take care > >> Rick Miller > >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> --- > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ldoms-discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ldoms-discuss > >> > > > -- > ===================================================== > Joe Balenzano > ISV Engineering [email protected] > Oracle Phone +1 203 462 9548 > Skype: jbalenzano > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ ldoms-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ldoms-discuss
