Can you provide a redacted dump of your libvirt xml file for the VM? Also, which OS profile are you using in Cloudstack for this? The Windows specific ones don't use virtio if I remember correctly, so you will need to select Virtio-SCSI 64bit in order for the xml to be built correctly.
-Si ________________________________ From: S.Fuller <steveful...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 11:38 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org <users@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: Re: Asymmetric traffic issues? EXTERNAL EMAIL: This message originated outside of ENA. Use caution when clicking links, opening attachments, or complying with requests. Click the "Phish Alert Report" button above the email, or contact MIS, regarding any suspicious message. Neither the block nor the scsi drivers appear to be running as far as I can tell. - Steve On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 11:07 AM Simon Weller <swel...@ena.com.invalid> wrote: > Steve, > > Are you running the virtio-block or virtio-scsi drivers? > > -Si > > > ________________________________ > From: S.Fuller <steveful...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 8:52 AM > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org <users@cloudstack.apache.org> > Subject: Re: Asymmetric traffic issues? > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: This message originated outside of ENA. Use caution when > clicking links, opening attachments, or complying with requests. Click the > "Phish Alert Report" button above the email, or contact MIS, regarding any > suspicious message. > > > > Well, I checked everything that I could for any QOS settings and there is > nothing configured there. What is curious is that Idon't see this behavior > when the transmitting host is running Linux, or if I'm using the E1000 > drivers (although with the E1000 driver, the overall throughput is lower). > It really feels like I'mrunning into some weird issue with the virtio > drivers on Windows. My Windows hosts are (to my knowledge) using the latest > version of the virtio drivers - 100.90.104.21700 dated 2/23/2022. > > Steve Fuller > steveful...@gmail.com > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 3:04 PM S.Fuller <steveful...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Vivek, > > > > Thanks for the reply. I am using the KVM hypervisor. I'll will review the > > QoS on the hypervisor for both of the nodes. > > > > I'm checking throughput between two different VMs that running on two > > different hosts within the same cluster. As of right now, I'm receiving > > similar results using both iperf3 and nuttcp as the testing tools. We are > > only seeing this issue when the VM is not on the same host as the vrouter > > for its isolated network. > > > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 6:40 AM Vivek Kumar > > <vivek.ku...@indiqus.com.invalid> wrote: > > > >> Hey Fuller, > >> > >> What hypervisor are you using ? I know you have checked all bandwidth > >> limit on templates and global settings, but it’s worth to check the QoS > on > >> the hypervisor level, because at the end it’s the hypervisor which > manages > >> all. And from where are you trying to check the network throughout, > >> between client and server ? > >> > >> > >> Vivek Kumar > >> Sr. Manager - Cloud & DevOps > >> TechOps | Indiqus Technologies > >> > >> + 91 7503460090 <tel:++91+7503460090> > >> vivek.ku...@indiqus.com <mailto:vivek.ku...@indiqus.com> > >> www.indiqus.com<http://www.indiqus.com> < > https://www.indiqus.com/> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On 28-Jun-2022, at 1:58 AM, S.Fuller <steveful...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > Environment: > >> > > >> > Two physical hosts > >> > - Cloudstack 4.11.3 > >> > - Verified that there are no bandwidth limits in place on any of the > >> > templates or in global settings. > >> > > >> > Two isolated networks ("Client" and "Server") > >> > - Each has a vrouter with a public and private address > >> > - One Windows 2016 VM on each network (running the latest virtio > >> drivers) > >> > - each node running latest version of Iperf3 to test throughput > >> > > >> > Testing/Observation: > >> > > >> > If the Client VM and the vrouter for the isolated Client network are > on > >> the > >> > same physical host, we see symmetrical throughput in the 2 Gbps range, > >> > whether we run iperf in regular mode or in reverse mode (iperf -R). > >> > > >> > If the Client VM and the vrouter for the isolated Client network are > on > >> > different physical hosts, we are seeing 25% of the throughput running > >> iperf > >> > in regular mode vs running it in reverse mode. > >> > > >> > Has anyone encountered this issue before? If we change the Client VM > to > >> > Linux (either CentOS 7 or Ubuntu) OR we use the E1000 driver, we see > >> > symmetrical throughput in our tests, no matter where the vrouter is in > >> > relation to the Client VM. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Steve Fuller > >> > steveful...@gmail.com > >> > >> > >> -- > >> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to > >> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged > >> information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the > >> original message and any copy of it from your computer system. You are > >> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this > >> communication is strictly prohibited unless proper authorization has > been > >> obtained for such action. If you have received this communication in > >> error, > >> please notify the sender immediately. Although IndiQus attempts to sweep > >> e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that both are > >> virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result > >> of > >> viruses. > >> > > > > > > -- > > Steve Fuller > > steveful...@gmail.com > > > > > -- > Steve Fuller > steveful...@gmail.com > -- Steve Fuller steveful...@gmail.com
