Re: [CentOS-virt] VMWare 4.1 and CentOS

[Bart Swedrowski]

On 25 October 2010 21:48, compdoc comp...@hotrodpc.com wrote:
 I use a service that allows sip or iax configurations of its trunk, and
 using IAX works better than my sip trunks.

That's interesting one.  Can you run zttest (or dahdi_test) and
provide some results as for accuracy?

From my experience (with Xen mainly) I was getting somewhere between
60-80 % accuracy which is really, really bad.

Regards,
Bart
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt

Re: [CentOS-virt] VMWare 4.1 and CentOS

[Bart Swedrowski]

On 24 October 2010 23:24, compdoc comp...@hotrodpc.com wrote:
 Trixbox CE runs perfectly as a centos kvm guest. And quite well with various
 brands of sip phones. Only drawback is I can't pass an analog pci voice
 card/hardware to the guest.

The problems with running Asterisk on virtualised platforms becomes
more visible when you try to run IAX trunks which are dependant on
zaptel (or -- these days -- dahdi) which is very dependent on RTC.

If you use just SIP it's gonna be fine.
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt

Re: [CentOS-virt] performance differences between kvm/xen

[Bart Swedrowski]

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 have done some testing some time ago on one of the EQ machines that
I got from hetzner.de.  Full spec of the machine was as following:

  * Intel® Core™ i7-920
  * 8 GB DDR3 RAM
  * 2 x 750 GB SATA-II HDD

It's nothing big but even though results are quite interesting.  All
tests were performed on CentOS 5.5 x86_64 with PostgreSQL 8.4 (from
CentOS repos).

I have run some PostgreSQL PGBench tests as well as Bonnie++ tests.
The PostgreSQL tests was divided into two tests having three goes (to
get an idea of average).  The commands I used for testing were:

 dropdb pgbench  sync  sleep 3  createdb pgbench  sync  sleep 3
 pgbench -i -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench  sync  sleep 3
 pgbench -c 10 -t 5000 -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench 2/dev/null  sync \
  sleep 3  pgbench -c 10 -t 5000 -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench 2/dev/null 
 \
  sync  sleep 3  pgbench -c 10 -t 5000 -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench 
 2/dev/null \
  sync  sleep 3

Now results.  First CentOS5/x86_64 without any virtualisation, without
any PostgreSQL optimisation:

-bash-3.2$ pgbench -c 10 -t 5000 -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench 2/dev/null
pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 141.191292 (including connections establishing)
tps = 141.196776 (excluding connections establishing)
-bash-3.2$ pgbench -c 10 -t 5000 -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench 2/dev/null
pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 156.479561 (including connections establishing)
tps = 156.486222 (excluding connections establishing)
-bash-3.2$ pgbench -c 10 -t 5000 -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench 2/dev/null
pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 164.880109 (including connections establishing)
tps = 164.888009 (excluding connections establishing)

Now after optimisation (shared_buffers, effective_cache_size etc.):

pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 403.430951 (including connections establishing)
tps = 403.474562 (excluding connections establishing)
pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 336.060764 (including connections establishing)
tps = 336.093214 (excluding connections establishing)
pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 446.607705 (including connections establishing)
tps = 446.664466 (excluding connections establishing)

Now KVM based VM with 7GB RAM and 8 CPUs.  Using virtio and LVM
partitions as backend.

PostgreSQL results *w/o* optimisation.

-bash-3.2$ pgbench -c 10 -t 5000 -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench
2/dev/null  sync  sleep 3  pgbench -c 10 -t 5000 -s 100 -U
postgres -d pgbench 2/dev/null  sync  sleep 3  pgbench -c 10 -t
5000 -s 100 -U postgres -d pgbench 2/dev/null  sync  sleep 3
pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 124.578488 (including connections establishing)
tps = 124.585776 (excluding connections establishing)
pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 140.451736 (including connections establishing)
tps = 140.463105 (excluding connections establishing)
pghost:  pgport:  nclients: 10 nxacts: 5000 dbName: pgbench
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 100
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 5000
number of transactions actually processed: 5/5
tps = 148.091563 (including connections establishing)