On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 06:28:10PM -0700, Curtis Doty wrote: > 8:33pm Daniel P. Berrange said: > > > >The pure-compute results look reasonable, but I don't believe those > >results for > >Disk I/O in fully-virt for a second - Section 6, Disk I/O Unixbench is the > >exact > >opposite of expectation - were results flipped?. Based knowledge of the > >architecture > > > > And is it even fair to compare tap:aio: to file: disks without even a > mention of the technical difference? It is as fair as you'll get for file-backed VMs. 'file:' for fully-virt doesn't have the same disadvantages / problems that 'file:' does for paravirt, since its actually better to compare 'tap:aio:' for PV with 'file:' for FV that to compare 'file:' with PV with 'file:' for FV. It would certainly be worth doing 2 sets of disk I/O tests though, one with file backed disks, and the other with raw partition / LVM backed disks. Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=| -- Fedora-xen mailing list Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen
