Re: [Users] How to make oVirt I/O write faster than Virtualbox and others?
On 03/13/2013 05:53 PM, Adrian Gibanel wrote: Although I haven't done a proper check I think it has improved a lot by disabling cpu scaling and letting performance Take a look at: http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=272109 Proxmox with direct LV as a hard disk is still faster but that makes sense because oVirt 3.1 only worked with files in filesystem and not with LVs. Maybe that 3.2 direct LUN support implies also LV support. you can check if that's the difference by using an LV for the disk (using a custom hook). if perf. change is dramatic, it may be worth considering local storage via lvm rather than local fs. ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] How to make oVirt I/O write faster than Virtualbox and others?
- Mensaje original - > De: "Yaniv Kaul" > Para: "Adrian Gibanel" > CC: "users" > Enviados: Jueves, 7 de Marzo 2013 8:08:55 > Asunto: Re: [Users] How to make oVirt I/O write faster than > Virtualbox and others? > - Original Message - > > > > Every benchmark out there features KVM as the best virtualisation > > technology. Even in the I/O write category. My results with oVirt > > are deceiving. So I'm going to explain my test machine, setup and > > ask your for advice to find out what's wrong. Any more data you > > need please ask for it. I like oVirt mostly because of its > > datacentre-aware web manager. But if it gets unusable I would have > > to take a look at other systems. > > Some random questions: > > > > * Is it a problem that sandbridge architecture is being detected as > > an Intel Conroe architecture? > > * Is there any easy way to test aio=native in oVirt when running > > virtual machines just for testing it? > Our testing showed that aio=threads works better for file-based > storage (vs. aio=native for block storage). > > * Should I test oVirt 3.2? Is there any improvement in I/O writing? > Probably not, but you should try with oVirt 3.2 nevertheless, for the > wealth of other features that might be useful now or later (direct > LUN for example). Interesting. > > * What about Fedora 18? Any improvements in I/O writing or, I don't > > know, the Virtio system? > Probably a newer QEMU and KVM can provide better performance. Did not > go through the complete changelog to verify it. Ok. > > * Any ovirt-node package for Debian/Ubuntu? The wiki seems like a > > draft (http://www.ovirt.org/Ovirt_build_on_debian/ubuntu). > > * Any I/O write consuming package that I should remove from stock > > Fedora just before installing it from the web manager? > > > > So... Any idea? > I'd start with comparing the complete QEMU command line between the > instances. I don't think it's only the -cpu that'll affect the > performance (unless the test is CPU bound?). Specifically, what > about the cache= setting? We use, for data safety, cache=none. That's what I did in the proxmox's manually run qemus. Some news: - Although I haven't done a proper check I think it has improved a lot by disabling cpu scaling and letting performance Take a look at: http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=272109 Proxmox with direct LV as a hard disk is still faster but that makes sense because oVirt 3.1 only worked with files in filesystem and not with LVs. Maybe that 3.2 direct LUN support implies also LV support. -- -- Adrián Gibanel I.T. Manager +34 675 683 301 www.btactic.com Ens podeu seguir a/Nos podeis seguir en: i Abans d´imprimir aquest missatge, pensa en el medi ambient. El medi ambient és cosa de tothom. / Antes de imprimir el mensaje piensa en el medio ambiente. El medio ambiente es cosa de todos. AVIS: El contingut d'aquest missatge i els seus annexos és confidencial. Si no en sou el destinatari, us fem saber que està prohibit utilitzar-lo, divulgar-lo i/o copiar-lo sense tenir l'autorització corresponent. Si heu rebut aquest missatge per error, us agrairem que ho feu saber immediatament al remitent i que procediu a destruir el missatge . AVISO: El contenido de este mensaje y de sus anexos es confidencial. Si no es el destinatario, les hacemos saber que está prohibido utilizarlo, divulgarlo y/o copiarlo sin tener la autorización correspondiente. Si han recibido este mensaje por error, les agradeceríamos que lo hagan saber inmediatamente al remitente y que procedan a destruir el mensaje . ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] How to make oVirt I/O write faster than Virtualbox and others?
- Original Message - > > Every benchmark out there features KVM as the best virtualisation > technology. Even in the I/O write category. My results with oVirt > are deceiving. So I'm going to explain my test machine, setup and > ask your for advice to find out what's wrong. Any more data you > need please ask for it. I like oVirt mostly because of its > datacentre-aware web manager. But if it gets unusable I would have > to take a look at other systems. > > Hardware machine for the host OS > - > * Sandy Bridge E > * CPU : Intel Xeon E5-1620 (10 MB Intel Smart Cache) > * Cores / Threads : 4 / 8 > * Frecuency : 3.6GHz / 3.8GHz Turbo Boost > * RAM : 64 GB DDR3 ECC > * Hard Disk : 2x 2TB SATA3 > * VT technology: Intel VT > > Common OS Setup for the host OS > - > * 2 hard disks RAIDSoft > > Guest OS common setup > - > * 1 socket x 1 core x 1 thread > * 2 GB RAM > * 300 GB Preallocated hard disk > * Virtualmin installed (Just an excuse to have a mysql server) > * Ubuntu 12.04 64bit > > Write I/O test > -- > The write I/O test is not standard one but a custom one. One of our > needs is to create new Mysql INNODB tables. These tables have to be > created in less than php maximum execution time so that some web > installations don't timeout when creating their databases. > DISCLAIMER: If you want to evaluate oVirt don't trust on these times, > please do your own tests. > > So the test creates table0 with two ints columns which are then > filled with 100 insert intos. Repeat that for 99 more tables. > Finally drop (delete) all the create tables. > > What I run is: > > mysql -u root -p -e "drop database test_create_tables" > mysql -u root -p -e "create database test_create_tables" > time mysql -u root -p test_create_tables < test_mysql.sql > > I attach test_mysql.sql gzipped just in case anyone is curious. > > Note that all the Proxmox tests are: Debian Squeeze + Proxmox (KVM). > It was never used openvz as a virtualisation technology. > > Test A - Debian Squeeze + Proxmox (KVM) > - > Description: This is proxmox booting a machine as KVM (not as > openvz). As said before only 1 socket and 1 core. > > real0m9.453s > user0m0.104s > sys 0m0.076s > > Test B - Proxmox (KVM, aio=threads) > > Description: Proxmox again. Qemu was run at hand by changing aio > parametre to be aio=threads (as oVirt uses) instead of aio=native. > > real0m9.510s > user0m0.080s > sys 0m0.096s > > Test C - Proxmox (linux-image-virtual kernel installed, aio=threads) > > Description: If we install linux-image-virtual kernel inside the > guest machine times are improved a bit. > > real0m8.691s > user0m0.104s > sys 0m0.080s > > Test D - Proxmox (ubuntu, linux-virtual, aio=threads y: -cpu > kvm64,+lahf_lm,+ssse3,-cx16) > --- > > real0m8.790s > user0m0.084s > sys 0m0.096s > > Test E - Proxmox (ubuntu, linux-virtual, aio=threads y: -cpu > kvm64,+lahf_lm,+ssse3,-cx16 -M pc-01.4) > - > real0m8.720s > user0m0.100s > sys 0m0.080s > > Test F - Proxmox (ubuntu, linux-virtual, aio=threads y: -cpu > kvm64,+lahf_lm,+ssse3,-cx16 -M pc-01.4 -rtc > base=2013-02-22T02:26:29,driftfix=slew) > > > real0m8.790s > user0m0.096s > sys 0m0.084s > > Test G - Virtualbox > -- > Description: Ubuntu 12.04 64bit as a host. This is Virtualbox 4.2 > with the extension pack installed. Notice that neither I installed > the guest additions tools in the guest machine nor the > linux-image-virtual kernel. > > real0m36.176s > user0m0.612s > sys 0m0.468s > > Test H - Fedora 17 64bit - oVirt 3.1 > --- > Description: This is Fedora 17 64bit oVirt 3.1 being installed in the > Host. Web manager is installed in another machine. SELinux is in > Permissive mode. Virtual machine is run at the same virtual machine > where storage is. The datacenter is setup as "Localhost on host" > type. Linux-image-virtual kernel installed inside the guest machine. > > real0m52.246s > user0m0.200s > sys 0m0.128s > > Test I - Fedora - oVirt 3.1 - vdsmd stopped. > --- > Description: This is Fedora 17 64bit oVirt 3.1 being installed in the > Host. Web manager is installed in another machine. SELinux is in > Permissive mode. Virtual machine is run at the same virtual machine > where storage is. The datacenter is setup as "Localhost on host" > type. Linux-image-virtual kernel installed inside the guest machine. > vdsmd daemon was stopped at the host was stopped just in case it was > the I/O decrease reason. > > real0m45.932s > user0m0.216s > sys 0m0.100s > > Some bits about the test: > > * If you're asking, yes, I've repeated the test several times and the > times I give here are representative. > The password was inserted manually when running mysql commands but > that's only
[Users] How to make oVirt I/O write faster than Virtualbox and others?
Every benchmark out there features KVM as the best virtualisation technology. Even in the I/O write category. My results with oVirt are deceiving. So I'm going to explain my test machine, setup and ask your for advice to find out what's wrong. Any more data you need please ask for it. I like oVirt mostly because of its datacentre-aware web manager. But if it gets unusable I would have to take a look at other systems. Hardware machine for the host OS - * Sandy Bridge E * CPU : Intel Xeon E5-1620 (10 MB Intel Smart Cache) * Cores / Threads : 4 / 8 * Frecuency : 3.6GHz / 3.8GHz Turbo Boost * RAM : 64 GB DDR3 ECC * Hard Disk : 2x 2TB SATA3 * VT technology: Intel VT Common OS Setup for the host OS - * 2 hard disks RAIDSoft Guest OS common setup - * 1 socket x 1 core x 1 thread * 2 GB RAM * 300 GB Preallocated hard disk * Virtualmin installed (Just an excuse to have a mysql server) * Ubuntu 12.04 64bit Write I/O test -- The write I/O test is not standard one but a custom one. One of our needs is to create new Mysql INNODB tables. These tables have to be created in less than php maximum execution time so that some web installations don't timeout when creating their databases. DISCLAIMER: If you want to evaluate oVirt don't trust on these times, please do your own tests. So the test creates table0 with two ints columns which are then filled with 100 insert intos. Repeat that for 99 more tables. Finally drop (delete) all the create tables. What I run is: mysql -u root -p -e "drop database test_create_tables" mysql -u root -p -e "create database test_create_tables" time mysql -u root -p test_create_tables < test_mysql.sql I attach test_mysql.sql gzipped just in case anyone is curious. Note that all the Proxmox tests are: Debian Squeeze + Proxmox (KVM). It was never used openvz as a virtualisation technology. Test A - Debian Squeeze + Proxmox (KVM) - Description: This is proxmox booting a machine as KVM (not as openvz). As said before only 1 socket and 1 core. real0m9.453s user0m0.104s sys 0m0.076s Test B - Proxmox (KVM, aio=threads) Description: Proxmox again. Qemu was run at hand by changing aio parametre to be aio=threads (as oVirt uses) instead of aio=native. real0m9.510s user0m0.080s sys 0m0.096s Test C - Proxmox (linux-image-virtual kernel installed, aio=threads) Description: If we install linux-image-virtual kernel inside the guest machine times are improved a bit. real0m8.691s user0m0.104s sys 0m0.080s Test D - Proxmox (ubuntu, linux-virtual, aio=threads y: -cpu kvm64,+lahf_lm,+ssse3,-cx16) --- real0m8.790s user0m0.084s sys 0m0.096s Test E - Proxmox (ubuntu, linux-virtual, aio=threads y: -cpu kvm64,+lahf_lm,+ssse3,-cx16 -M pc-01.4) - real0m8.720s user0m0.100s sys 0m0.080s Test F - Proxmox (ubuntu, linux-virtual, aio=threads y: -cpu kvm64,+lahf_lm,+ssse3,-cx16 -M pc-01.4 -rtc base=2013-02-22T02:26:29,driftfix=slew) real0m8.790s user0m0.096s sys 0m0.084s Test G - Virtualbox -- Description: Ubuntu 12.04 64bit as a host. This is Virtualbox 4.2 with the extension pack installed. Notice that neither I installed the guest additions tools in the guest machine nor the linux-image-virtual kernel. real0m36.176s user0m0.612s sys 0m0.468s Test H - Fedora 17 64bit - oVirt 3.1 --- Description: This is Fedora 17 64bit oVirt 3.1 being installed in the Host. Web manager is installed in another machine. SELinux is in Permissive mode. Virtual machine is run at the same virtual machine where storage is. The datacenter is setup as "Localhost on host" type. Linux-image-virtual kernel installed inside the guest machine. real0m52.246s user0m0.200s sys 0m0.128s Test I - Fedora - oVirt 3.1 - vdsmd stopped. --- Description: This is Fedora 17 64bit oVirt 3.1 being installed in the Host. Web manager is installed in another machine. SELinux is in Permissive mode. Virtual machine is run at the same virtual machine where storage is. The datacenter is setup as "Localhost on host" type. Linux-image-virtual kernel installed inside the guest machine. vdsmd daemon was stopped at the host was stopped just in case it was the I/O decrease reason. real0m45.932s user0m0.216s sys 0m0.100s Some bits about the test: * If you're asking, yes, I've repeated the test several times and the times I give here are representative. The password was inserted manually when running mysql commands but that's only 1 to 2 seconds less which doesn't explain the huge differences between the tests. * I also tried Fedora 64bit and Centos 64bit as guest systems and the results were worse. * I also tried other less powerful machines which work ok with Virtualbox but have poor I/O write results with oVirt. * The B-F Pr
