On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 05:05:42PM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 10:35 -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 14:14 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:31:20AM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
Make vhost scalable by creating a
On Sun, 2010-04-11 at 18:47 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 05:05:42PM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 10:35 -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 14:14 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:31:20AM
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:35:31AM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Sun, 2010-04-11 at 18:47 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 05:05:42PM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 10:35 -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 14:14
Consider using Ingo's perf tool to get error bars, but looks good
overall.
What do you mean by getting error bars?
How noisy are the numbers?
I'd like to see something along the lines of 85% +- 2%
In netperf terms that would be adding the confidence intervals calculations to
the results
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 05:05:42PM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 10:35 -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 14:14 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:31:20AM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
Make vhost scalable by creating a
On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 17:14 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
Here are the results with netperf TCP_STREAM 64K guest to host on a
8-cpu Nehalem system.
I presume you mean 8 core Nehalem-EP, or did you mean 8 processor Nehalem-EX?
Yes. It is a 2 socket quad-core Nehalem. so i guess it is a 8 core
Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 17:14 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
Here are the results with netperf TCP_STREAM 64K guest to host on a
8-cpu Nehalem system.
I presume you mean 8 core Nehalem-EP, or did you mean 8 processor Nehalem-EX?
Yes. It is a 2 socket quad-core Nehalem. so
On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 10:35 -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 14:14 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:31:20AM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
Make vhost scalable by creating a separate vhost thread per vhost
device. This provides better
Here are the results with netperf TCP_STREAM 64K guest to host on a
8-cpu Nehalem system.
I presume you mean 8 core Nehalem-EP, or did you mean 8 processor Nehalem-EX?
Don't get me wrong, I *like* the netperf 64K TCP_STREAM test, I lik it a lot!-)
but I find it incomplete and also like to
On 04/05/2010 08:35 PM, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 14:14 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:31:20AM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
Make vhost scalable by creating a separate vhost thread per vhost
device. This provides better scaling
On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 14:14 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:31:20AM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
Make vhost scalable by creating a separate vhost thread per vhost
device. This provides better scaling across multiple guests and with
multiple interfaces in a
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:31:20AM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
Make vhost scalable by creating a separate vhost thread per vhost
device. This provides better scaling across multiple guests and with
multiple interfaces in a guest.
Thanks for looking into this. An alternative approach is
to
Make vhost scalable by creating a separate vhost thread per vhost
device. This provides better scaling across multiple guests and with
multiple interfaces in a guest.
I am seeing better aggregated througput/latency when running netperf
across multiple guests or multiple interfaces in a guest in
13 matches
Mail list logo
