On 16-03-30 06:15 PM, Dave Finster wrote:
It is worth mentioning that due to the design decisions around disk I/O in
KVMs, for good performance (which itself is subjective) to be realised, you
*really really* need a good SSD based SLOG in the zpool.
My personal favourite is the HGST SSD800MH.B
The reasoning here is that every write operation inside a KVM is synchronous to
the zpool. A zpool that is not optimised to cater for synchronous writes will
not yield very good results.
- Dave
On 31 Mar 2016, at 11:09 AM, Ian Collins <i...@ianshome.com> wrote:
On 03/31/16 13:32, Humberto Ramirez wrote:
Is anybody familiar with any recent perfomance comparison of KVM vs VMWare ESX?
Or perhaps someone who had been running ESX and migrated to SmartOS on the same
hardware?
I found an old a paper from 2012 on which ESX outperformed KVM by 30% and
sometimes for as much as 45%, of course 4 years is an eternity and that KVM
system was not running SmartOS nor ZFS.
I haven't compared like for like for a while, but of all the systems I've moved
from VmWare to SmartOS KVM, there has been a performance gain, especially I/O.
The KVM overhead for Ubuntu tested by building gcc compared to bare metal is
about 8-9%. For windows I've seen SmartOS KVM return better than bare metal
numbers (ZFS?) running MS-SQL benchmarks.
On like for like hardware, I can't see how VmWare+NAS can best KVM+ZFS.
You should try a comparison with your expected workload.
--
Ian.
This is a great discussion.
I am wondering, what about network performance?
thanks,
Geoff
-------------------------------------------
smartos-discuss
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184463/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184463/25769125-55cfbc00
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=25769125&id_secret=25769125-7688e9fb
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
