On 22.03.2012 19:05, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> On 22.03.2012 15:06, Anthony Bourguignon wrote:
>> Package: qemu-kvm
>> Version: 1.0+dfsg-9
>> Severity: important
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I encountered an issue with version 1.0+dfsg-9 of qemu-kvm (it worked fine
>> with 1.0+dfsg-8). The network performanc
Le jeudi 22 mars 2012 à 19:12 +0400, Michael Tokarev a écrit :
> severity 665046 wishlist
> tags 665046 + unreproducible
> thanks
>
> On 22.03.2012 19:05, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> []
> > There was no network-related changes between -8 and -9.
> > Macvtap performance has always been awful from the
On 22.03.2012 19:58, Anthony Bourguignon wrote:
[]
>> I tested macvtap device on -8 and -9 briefly (had to tweak
>> my regular bridge setup quite a bit for that to work), and
>> I see exactly the same (bad) performance with both versions.
> I've just tested again. I ran a virtual machine with -8 a
severity 665046 wishlist
tags 665046 + unreproducible
thanks
On 22.03.2012 19:05, Michael Tokarev wrote:
[]
> There was no network-related changes between -8 and -9.
> Macvtap performance has always been awful from the ground up,
> but this is due to kernel not qemu. Reportedly it become a
> bit
On 22.03.2012 15:06, Anthony Bourguignon wrote:
> Package: qemu-kvm
> Version: 1.0+dfsg-9
> Severity: important
>
> Hello,
>
> I encountered an issue with version 1.0+dfsg-9 of qemu-kvm (it worked fine
> with 1.0+dfsg-8). The network performances are really bad when I'm using
> vhost and macvta
Package: qemu-kvm
Version: 1.0+dfsg-9
Severity: important
Hello,
I encountered an issue with version 1.0+dfsg-9 of qemu-kvm (it worked fine with
1.0+dfsg-8). The network performances are really bad when I'm using vhost and
macvtap (bridge mode). Here is the cmdline launch by libvirt :
/usr/bin
6 matches
Mail list logo
