----- Forwarded message from Zhi Yong Wu <wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> -----
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 11:55:17 +0800
From: Zhi Yong Wu <wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berra...@redhat.com>, Stefan Hajnoczi
<stefa...@gmail.com>, Adam Litke <a...@us.ibm.com>, Zhi Yong Wu
<wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, QEMU Developers <qemu-de...@nongnu.org>,
guijianf...@cn.fujitsu.com, hu...@cn.fujitsu.com
Subject: [RFC] block I/O throttling: how to enable in libvirt
Message-ID: <20110901035517.gd16...@f15.cn.ibm.com>
References: <CAEH94Li_C=BOe2gV8NyM48njYWMBAo9MTGc1eUOh-Y=cods...@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJSP0QW1CPCokX=F5z7y==vn1s4wh0vtoaq7oj4kc7f7uqm...@mail.gmail.com>
<20110830134636.gb29...@aglitke.rchland.ibm.com>
<CAJSP0QUHm=y8xjc_kxrg7uffzt3k_xddfqb--sxjc+c0gjo...@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To:
<CAJSP0QUHm=y8xjc_kxrg7uffzt3k_xddfqb--sxjc+c0gjo...@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Xagent-From: wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
X-Xagent-To: wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
X-Xagent-Gateway: vmsdvma.vnet.ibm.com (XAGENTU7 at VMSDVMA)
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 08:18:19AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>Subject: Re: The design choice for how to enable block I/O throttling
> function in libvirt
>From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com>
>To: Adam Litke <a...@us.ibm.com>
>Cc: libvir-list@redhat.com, "Daniel P. Berrange" <berra...@redhat.com>, Zhi
> Yong Wu <wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.ker...@gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
>X-Xagent-From: stefa...@gmail.com
>X-Xagent-To: wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
>X-Xagent-Gateway: bldgate.vnet.ibm.com (XAGENTU7 at BLDGATE)
>
>On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Adam Litke <a...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 09:53:33AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 3:55 AM, Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.ker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > I am trying to enable block I/O throttling function in libvirt. But
>>> > currently i met some design questions, and don't make sure if we
>>> > should extend blkiotune to support block I/O throttling or introduce
>>> > one new libvirt command "blkiothrottle" to cover it or not. If you
>>> > have some better idea, pls don't hesitate to drop your comments.
>>>
>>> A little bit of context: this discussion is about adding libvirt
>>> support for QEMU disk I/O throttling.
>>
>> Thanks for the additional context Stefan.
>>
>>> Today libvirt supports the cgroups blkio-controller, which handles
>>> proportional shares and throughput/iops limits on host block devices.
>>> blkio-controller does not support network file systems (NFS) or other
>>> QEMU remote block drivers (curl, Ceph/rbd, sheepdog) since they are
>>> not host block devices. QEMU I/O throttling works with all types of
>>> -drive and therefore complements blkio-controller.
>>
>> The first question that pops into my mind is: Should a user need to
>> understand
>> when to use the cgroups blkio-controller vs. the QEMU I/O throttling method?
>> In
>> my opinion, it would be nice if libvirt had a single interface for block I/O
>> throttling and libvirt would decide which mechanism to use based on the type
>> of
>> device and the specific limits that need to be set.
>
>Yes, I agree it would be simplest to pick the right mechanism,
>depending on the type of throttling the user wants. More below.
>
>>> I/O throttling can be applied independently to each -drive attached to
>>> a guest and supports throughput/iops limits. For more information on
>>> this QEMU feature and a comparison with blkio-controller, see Ryan
>>> Harper's KVM Forum 2011 presentation:
>>
>>> http://www.linux-kvm.org/wiki/images/7/72/2011-forum-keep-a-limit-on-it-io-throttling-in-qemu.pdf
>>
>> From the presentation, it seems that both the cgroups method the the qemu
>> method
>> offer comparable control (assuming a block device) so it might possible to
>> apply
>> either method from the same API in a transparent manner. Am I correct or
>> are we
>> suggesting that the Qemu throttling approach should always be used for Qemu
>> domains?
>
>QEMU I/O throttling does not provide a proportional share mechanism.
>So you cannot assign weights to VMs and let them receive a fraction of
>the available disk time. That is only supported by cgroups
>blkio-controller because it requires a global view which QEMU does not
>have.
>
>So I think the two are complementary:
>
>If proportional share should be used on a host block device, use
>cgroups blkio-controller.
>Otherwise use QEMU I/O throttling.
Stefan,
Do you agree with introducing one new libvirt command blkiothrottle now?
If so, i will work on the code draft to make it work.
Daniel and other maintainers,
If you are available, can you make some comments for us?:)
Regards,
Zhi Yong Wu
>
>Stefan
----- End forwarded message -----
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
