Hello,

I think that I've mixed the values in my first email for this topic and 
actually provided the values without network virtio enabled.
So the values for a kvm vmu with enabled virtio are indeed a little better but 
not as good as Xen.
At the moment I'm still working to get the virtio disk vmu setup working as I 
think it would be interesting how the performance values would improve.

All following tests have been executed using a vmu (ram 512 mb, 1 core 2,2 GHz) 
and the vlc (video player, that can f.e. stream, receive, transcode videos)

VMU setup for first performance values (without network virtio)
/usr/bin/qemu-kvm -boot c -hda /images/vmu01.raw -m 512 -net 
nic,vlan=0,macaddr=aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:10 -net 
tap,ifname=tap0,vlan=0,script=/etc/kvm/qemu-ifup,downscript=/etc/kvm/qemu-ifdown
 -net nic,vlan=1,macaddr=aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:11 -net 
tap,ifname=tap1,vlan=1,script=/etc/kvm/qemu-ifup,downscript=/etc/kvm/qemu-ifdown
 -vnc 127.0.0.1:2 -k de --daemonize

VMU setup for second performance values (with network virtio)
/usr/bin/qemu-kvm -boot c -hda /images/vmu01.raw -m 512 -net 
nic,vlan=0,macaddr=aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:10,model=virtio -net 
tap,ifname=tap0,vlan=0,script=/etc/kvm/qemu-ifup,downscript=/etc/kvm/qemu-ifdown
 -net nic,vlan=1,macaddr=aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:11,model=virtio -net 
tap,ifname=tap1,vlan=1,script=/etc/kvm/qemu-ifup,downscript=/etc/kvm/qemu-ifdown
 -vnc 127.0.0.1:2 -k de --daemonize



The first column of performance values show the VMU without virtio network, the 
second column with virtio network

1. Subtest: VLC reads video from local disk and streams it via udp to another pc
                Host performance:               11%             11%
            kvm process in host (top):  22%             22%
                vlc process in vmu (top):       15%             7%

2. Subtest: Just receiving a video via udp  (no displaying as no X11 is 
installed on the vmu)
                Host performance:               16%             10%
            kvm process in host (top) : 30%             17%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :      3%              3%


3. Subtest: Receiving a video via udp and saving it locally in a file
                Host performance:               17%             11%
            kvm process in host (top) :         38%             24%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :      12%             11%


4. Subtest: Reading video locally, adding a logo to the video stream and then 
saving the video locally
                Host performance:               50%             50%
            kvm process in host (top) :         99%             99%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :      99%             99%


5. Subtest: Receiving the video from pc 1 and at the same time streaming the 
received video to pc 2
                Host performance:               23%             18%
            kvm process in host (top) :         22%             35%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :      48%             10%

6. The originial test: receiving streamed video, adding a logo and the sending 
it to another pc
                Host performance:               52%                     50%
            kvm process in host (top) :         77-99%          60-99%  (for 
both most time 99%)
                vlc process in vmu (top) :      80-99%          50-99%  (for 
both most time 99%)


I've have repeated almost all tests with XEN 

1. Subtest: VLC reads video from local disk and streams it via udp to another pc
                Host performance (Domain-0 + vmu)(virt-manager):        4% 
            VMU (virt-manager) :                                                
2%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :                                      
1%

3. Subtest: Receiving a video via udp and saving it locally in a file
                Host performance (Domain-0 + vmu)(virt-manager):        7% 
           VMU (virt-manager) :                                                 
4%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :                                      
3%

4. Subtest: Reading video locally, adding a logo to the video stream and then 
saving the video locally          
                Host performance (Domain-0 + vmu)(virt-manager):        3-55% 
            VMU (virt-manager) :                                                
0-50%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :                                      
14 -99% varies a lot 

5. Subtest: Receiving the video from pc 1 and at the same time streaming the 
received video to pc 2             
                Host performance (Domain-0 + vmu)(virt-manager):        6% 
            VMU (virt-manager) :                                                
3%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :                                      
1%

6. The originial test: receiving streamed video, adding a logo and the sending 
it to another pc
                Host performance (Domain-0 + vmu)(virt-manager):        23% 
            VMU (virt-manager) :                                                
18%
                vlc process in vmu (top) :                                      
33,8%


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Avi Kivity [mailto:a...@redhat.com] 
Gesendet: Montag, 6. April 2009 18:36
An: BRAUN, Stefanie
Betreff: Re: AW: KVM performance

BRAUN, Stefanie wrote:
> Is this a tcp test?
>
> Can you test receive and transmit separately?
>
> Hello,
>
> it's a "transcoder" test, but without transcoding between video 
> formats, the vmu just adds a logo (a watermark) into the video.
>
> At the same time the vmu performed several actions:
> - receiving a streamed video via udp
> - adding a logo to the video
> - sending the streamed video via udp
>
> But I think I can split up the test into the following subtests and 
> provide further performance values Sub test 1 receive:  - Receiving 
> the video from network (udp) and saving locally Sub test 2 transmit: - 
> Reading the video from local ressource and sending via network Sub test 3 
> process:  - Reading the video from local ressource, adding the logo to the 
> video stream and saving it again locally.
>  
>   

We have a known issue with udp transmits, you might be hitting that.  
Please do separate your tests so we can see what the root cause is.

--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too 
narrow to contain.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to