On 07/16/2009 03:20 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
It's really just a standard Intel or Supermicro motherboard in a box that
has been painted purple (or blue/green now I guess), so it really
shouldn't have extra numa factors compared to other Nehalem systems.
Have you been transferred to marketing?
-
On 07/12/2009 10:38 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 07/09/2009 09:01 PM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
Test runs after make clean...
time (make -j12&& make -j12 modules)
real 10m25.585s
user 26m36.450s
sys 8m14.776s
2nd trial (make clean followed by the same test again.
real 9m21.626s
user 26m42.144s
sys 8m14
On 07/09/2009 09:01 PM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
Please drop -usbdevice tablet and set the host I/O scheduler to
deadline. Add cache=none to the -drive options.
yes, these changes make a difference.
Before starting qemu-kvm, I did this to change the IO scheduler:
BEFORE:
# for f in /sys/
>> Timing with the rotational stuff set to 1...
>>
>> real14m13.015s
>> user29m42.162s
>> sys 8m37.416s
>
> (user + sys) / real = 2.7
>
>> And finally, to confirm the numbers on the host with no guest running...
>> The same disk/filesystem, now mounted on the host instead of the guest,
On 07/09/2009 05:36 AM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
Haven't followed the thread in great detail, but has anyone tried
putting the virtio disk back into rotational mode?
Hello. I haven't had a chance to try all the suggestions in the thread
so far. However, I did just run some tests with block
> Haven't followed the thread in great detail, but has anyone tried
> putting the virtio disk back into rotational mode?
Hello. I haven't had a chance to try all the suggestions in the thread
so far. However, I did just run some tests with block queue rotation
settings tonight.
For the problem
On 07/03/2009 01:41 PM, Matty wrote:
What is the host cpu type? On pre-Nehalem/Barcelona processors kvm has poor
scalability in mmu intensive workloads like kernel builds.
Hey Avi,
Are there plans to address these scalability issues for
pre-Nehalem/Barcelona processors? I poked around t
> Haven't followed the thread in great detail, but has anyone tried
> putting the virtio disk back into rotational mode?
Thanks Mark.
I have not tried this yet.
To be honest, I wasn't fully understanding some of Avi's last comments and
was waiting for one of my co-workers to be available to help
On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 12:41 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 07/02/2009 08:48 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >> HOST time (make -j12&& make -j12 modules) with no guest running
> >>
> >> real6m50.936s
> >> user29m12.051s
> >> sys5m
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> I performed tests on two different systems to be sure it isn't related to
>> specific hardware.
>>
>
> What is the host cpu type? On pre-Nehalem/Barcelona processors kvm has poor
> scalability in mmu intensive workloads like kernel builds.
Hey
On 07/02/2009 08:48 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
HOST time (make -j12&& make -j12 modules) with no guest running
real6m50.936s
user29m12.051s
sys5m50.867s
35 minutes cpu run on 7 minutes real time, so scaling 1:7. User ti
On 07/02/2009 12:41 AM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
I wanted to post in to the thread the lastest test run.
Avi Kivity provided some ideas to try. I had mixed luck. I'd like to try
this again if we have any thoughts on the vpid/ept issue, or any other
ideas for drilling down on this. Avi Kivity ment
I wanted to post in to the thread the lastest test run.
Avi Kivity provided some ideas to try. I had mixed luck. I'd like to try
this again if we have any thoughts on the vpid/ept issue, or any other
ideas for drilling down on this. Avi Kivity mentioned LVM in the thread.
I continued to just ex
On 06/28/2009 10:05 PM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
* In some of the timing runs on this system, the "real time" reported by
the time command was off by 10 to 11 times. Issues were found in
the messages file that seemed to relate to this including HUGE time
adjustments by NTP and kern
>> * In some of the timing runs on this system, the "real time" reported by
>> the time command was off by 10 to 11 times. Issues were found in
>> the messages file that seemed to relate to this including HUGE time
>> adjustments by NTP and kernel hrtimer 'interrupt too slow' message
On 06/19/2009 02:07 AM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
Hello. I'll top-post since the quoted text is just for reference.
Sorry the follow-up testing took so long. We're very low on 5500/Nehalem
resources at the moment and I had to track down lots of stuff before
getting to the test.
I ran some tests on
Hello. I'll top-post since the quoted text is just for reference.
Sorry the follow-up testing took so long. We're very low on 5500/Nehalem
resources at the moment and I had to track down lots of stuff before
getting to the test.
I ran some tests on a 2-socket, 8-core system. I wasn't pleased w
On 06/16/2009 10:03 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
So if I understand what you're saying: best not to use kvm guests
for build
servers with pre-Nehalem processors.
pre-Nehalem / pre-Barcelona, > 4 vcpus, yes.
How about 2 vcpus, and how about AMD processors ?
2 vcpus (or 4) should be fine. AMD
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 06/15/2009 06:25 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 06/15/2009 05:15 PM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
[]
So if I understand what you're saying: best not to use kvm guests for build
servers with pre-Nehalem processors.
pre-Nehalem / pre-Barcelona, > 4 vcpus, yes.
On 06/15/2009 06:25 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 06/15/2009 05:15 PM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
[]
So if I understand what you're saying: best not to use kvm guests
for build
servers with pre-Nehalem processors.
pre-Nehalem / pre-Barcelona, > 4 vcpus, yes.
How about 2 vcpus
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 06/15/2009 05:15 PM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
[]
So if I understand what you're saying: best not to use kvm guests for build
servers with pre-Nehalem processors.
pre-Nehalem / pre-Barcelona, > 4 vcpus, yes.
How about 2 vcpus, and how about AMD processors ?
Thanks
/mjt
--
On 06/15/2009 05:15 PM, Erik Jacobson wrote:
What is the host cpu type? On pre-Nehalem/Barcelona processors kvm has
poor scalability in mmu intensive workloads like kernel builds.
Thanks for getting back to me.
Today is pretty booked but I'm going to go find a Nehalem system and try to
> What is the host cpu type? On pre-Nehalem/Barcelona processors kvm has
> poor scalability in mmu intensive workloads like kernel builds.
Thanks for getting back to me.
Today is pretty booked but I'm going to go find a Nehalem system and try to
run similar tests to compare. I'll post my resu
Erik Jacobson wrote:
We have been trying to test qemu-kvm virtual machines under an IO load.
The IO load is quite simple: A timed build of the linux kernel and modules.
I have found that virtual machines take more than twice as long to do this
build as the host. It doesn't seem to matter if I us
We have been trying to test qemu-kvm virtual machines under an IO load.
The IO load is quite simple: A timed build of the linux kernel and modules.
I have found that virtual machines take more than twice as long to do this
build as the host. It doesn't seem to matter if I use virtio or not, Using
25 matches
Mail list logo
