Hi Grant,
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Grant McWilliams
grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
Todd, I think there's more than one way to look at this as well. As Xen
becomes more of a product and less of an installable package
it will probably have to be profiled as a product.
The XCP devs
On Oct 25, 2010, at 8:14 AM, Todd Deshane wrote:
I was also going to mention that we should look at scalability and
performance isolation.
Some references and previous studies here:
http://todddeshane.net/research/Xen_versus_KVM_20080623.pdf
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Eric Searcy emsea...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 25, 2010, at 8:14 AM, Todd Deshane wrote:
I was also going to mention that we should look at scalability and
performance isolation.
Some references and previous studies here:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Grant McWilliams
grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Grant McWilliams
grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org
wrote:
On 10/21/2010 12:01 AM, Grant McWilliams
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:47:03PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 10/19/2010 09:41 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 09:58:15PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 10/16/2010 08:11 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 02:16:42PM +0100, Bart
On 10/21/2010 12:01 AM, Grant McWilliams wrote:
So what we're on the verge of doing here is creating a test set... I'd
love to see a shell script that ran a bunch of tests, gathered data
about the system and then created an archive that would then be uploaded
to a website which created graphs.
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.orgwrote:
On 10/21/2010 12:01 AM, Grant McWilliams wrote:
So what we're on the verge of doing here is creating a test set... I'd
love to see a shell script that ran a bunch of tests, gathered data
about the system and then
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Grant McWilliams
grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.orgwrote:
On 10/21/2010 12:01 AM, Grant McWilliams wrote:
So what we're on the verge of doing here is creating a test set... I'd
love to
If I understand that paper correctly, HVM+VT-d outperforms PV by quite a
lot (if you have VT-d support on your system).
Thanks for that link. Just to make my criticism of the initial claim more
clear: I don't claim that HVM can never be faster than PV but that you need
to understand when
On 10/20/2010 08:12 AM, Grant McWilliams wrote:
If I understand that paper correctly, HVM+VT-d outperforms PV by quite
a
lot (if you have VT-d support on your system).
Thanks for that link. Just to make my criticism of the initial claim more
clear: I don't claim
On 10/20/2010 12:35 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
Being skeptical is the best approach in the absence of
verifiable/falsifiable data. Today or tomorrow I'll get my hands on a new
host system and although it is supposed to go into production immediately I
will probably find some time to do
Ok so I'd like to help, since most folks have Intel Chipsets, I have a AMD
4p(16 core)/32gig memory opteron server that I'm running that we can get
some numbers onbut it would be nice if we could run apples to apples...I
have iozone loaded and can run that but would be nice to run using the
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Tom Bishop bisho...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok so I'd like to help, since most folks have Intel Chipsets, I have a AMD
4p(16 core)/32gig memory opteron server that I'm running that we can get
some numbers onbut it would be nice if we could run apples to apples...I
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 09:58:15PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 10/16/2010 08:11 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 02:16:42PM +0100, Bart Swedrowski wrote:
Hi Karanbir,
On 14 October 2010 19:59, Karanbir Singhmail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On 10/14/2010 07:48
On 10/19/2010 09:41 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 09:58:15PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 10/16/2010 08:11 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 02:16:42PM +0100, Bart Swedrowski wrote:
Hi Karanbir,
On 14 October 2010 19:59, Karanbir
On 10/19/2010 01:16 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
On 10/19/2010 03:47 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 10/19/2010 09:41 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
It's because of the x86_64 architecture, afaik.
There was some good technical explananation about it,
but I can't remember the url now.
In that
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
denni...@conversis.de wrote:
On 10/16/2010 08:11 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 02:16:42PM +0100, Bart Swedrowski wrote:
Hi Karanbir,
On 14 October 2010 19:59, Karanbir Singhmail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 02:16:42PM +0100, Bart Swedrowski wrote:
Hi Karanbir,
On 14 October 2010 19:59, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On 10/14/2010 07:48 AM, Tom Bishop wrote:
I think xen is still on top in terms of performance and featuresnow
that is indeed what it
On 10/16/2010 08:11 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 02:16:42PM +0100, Bart Swedrowski wrote:
Hi Karanbir,
On 14 October 2010 19:59, Karanbir Singhmail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On 10/14/2010 07:48 AM, Tom Bishop wrote:
I think xen is still on top in terms of performance and
On 10/15/2010 02:00 PM, John L. Magee wrote:
One thing to possibly consider with PostgreSQL performance especially,
is that when using KVM VMs for some applications, PostgreSQL could be
run native. This is a viable approach with KVM that could never work
with Xen.
Can you expand on this a
I think he's right. Run PostgreSQL on the centos host directly, rather than
from within a guest. The vm guests could access the database over the
virtual lan, so speed of access for guests on the same server wouldn't be an
issue.
There are lots of ways of file sharing for example. You can share
On 10/15/2010 10:56 PM, compdoc wrote:
I think he's right. Run PostgreSQL on the centos host directly, rather than
from within a guest. The vm guests could access the database over the
virtual lan, so speed of access for guests on the same server wouldn't be an
issue.
I don't understand why
I don't have any benchmarks per se just my recent testing of them
I think xen is still on top in terms of performance and featuresnow
having said that my experience in the past with kvm and my latest testing
with 5.5 and KVM I can say that KVM has made great strides with the virtio
On 10/14/2010 07:48 AM, Tom Bishop wrote:
I think xen is still on top in terms of performance and featuresnow
that is indeed what it 'feels' like, but I'm quite keen on putting some
numbers on that.
having said that my experience in the past with kvm and my latest
testing with 5.5 and
When you get the numbers please share, as I for one would be very
interestedI have read some on the web but nothing as of late.I just
don't have the time right now to go benchmark anything
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.orgwrote:
On 10/14/2010 07:48
Hi Karanbir,
On 14 October 2010 19:59, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On 10/14/2010 07:48 AM, Tom Bishop wrote:
I think xen is still on top in terms of performance and featuresnow
that is indeed what it 'feels' like, but I'm quite keen on putting some
numbers on that.
I
26 matches
Mail list logo
