Re: [Xen-users] Xen Performance

Peter Booth
Thu, 28 May 2009 16:57:45 -0000

The 8% is a dangerous over-simplification, and represents simply the
results of a particular well-designed study.
  Clearly there are situations where the overhead of using Xen is much
higher than this.

On May 24, 2009, at 6:12 AM, Amir Maqbool Ahmed wrote:

> Hi
>
> I am a student at the University College of Oslo and have in one
> experiment
> tried to test the performance of Xenolinux compared to Native linux
> on Debian lenny
> 2.6.26-2 kernel.
>
> bonnie++ the disk IO bechmark program was used among other tests
> like cpu intensive scripts.
> The goal is to prove the statement (Once again) that Xen adds only
> an overhead of maximum 8%.
>
> The Results of bonnie++ have been surprizing and I want to explain
> them.
> It shows that for some types of Disk IO, like sequential delete and
> random create
> Xen performs faster than native linux. A full comparison chart is
> attached as a pdf.
> The test are run first from native linux than both from Dom0 and a
> DomU with the same results.
>
> Can you please help me understand these results, How can Xenolinux
> perform faster
> although only for some types of operations, then native linux?
>
> Plese forgive me If Im missing something completely obvious.
> If you need any further info. please just send me an email and it
> will be provided.
>
> Hope to hear from you soon
>
> Amir Ahmed
> <io-graph.pdf>_______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users