[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 0/6] A migration performance testing framewor

From: Daniel P. Berrange
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 0/6] A migration performance testing framework
Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 16:01:56 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01)

On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 04:39:45PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Daniel P. Berrange (address@hidden) wrote:
> > Some interesting things that I have observed with this

> >  - Post-copy, by its very nature, obviously ensured that the migraton would
> >    complete. While post-copy was running in pre-copy mode there was a 
> > somewhat
> >    chaotic small impact on guest CPU performance, causing performance to
> >    periodically oscillate between 400ms/GB and 800ms/GB. This is less than
> >    the impact at the start of each migration iteration which was 1000ms/GB
> >    in this test. There was also a massive penalty at time of switchover from
> >    pre to post copy, as to be expected. The migration completed in post-copy
> >    phase quite quickly though. For this workload, number of iterations in
> >    pre-copy mode before switching to post-copy did not have much impact. I
> >    expect a less extreme workload would have shown more interesting results
> >    wrt number of iterations of pre-copy:
> > 
> >     
> > https://berrange.fedorapeople.org/qemu-mig-test-2016-05-05/tcp-remote-8gb-4cpu/post-copy-iters.html
> Hmm; I hadn't actually expected that much performance difference during the
> precopy phase (it used to in earlier postcopy versions but the later versions
> should have got simpler).  The number of iterations wouldn't make that much 
> difference
> for your workload - because you're changing all of memory then we're going to 
> have to
> resend it; if you had a workload where some of the memory was mostly static
> and some was rapidly changing, then one or two passes to transfer the mostly
> static data would show a benefit.

Ok, so I have repeated the tests with a standard kernel. I also measured
the exact same settings except without post-copy active, and also see
the exact same magnitude of jitter without post-copy. IOW, this is not
the fault of post-copy, its a factor whenever migration is running. What
is most interesting is that I see greater jitter in guest performance,
the higher the overall network transfer bandwidth is. ie with migration
throttled to 100mbs, the jitter is massively smaller than the jitter when
it is allowed to use 10gbs. Also, I only see the jitter on my 4 vCPU guest,
not the 1 vCPU guest.

The QEMU process is confined to only run on 4 pCPUs, so I believe the
cause of this jitter is simply a result of the migration thread in QEMU
stealing a little time from the vCPU threads.

IOW completely expected and there is no penalty of having post-copy
enabled even if you never get beyond the pre-copy stage :-)

|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]