Well that's funny.
Just a few hours after my last post, which suggested that virtio based networking might be getting bested by the not-in-userspace v-bus, Michael Tsirkin posts an in-kernel backend to virtio. Which puts the two on more or less the same procedural footing.
Fire up the benchmarks?
Real data and musings on the performance of networks, servers, protocols, and their related folks.
Monday, August 10, 2009
(not) switching contexts.
a lot of bits have been spilled over virtual network performance in v-bus vs virtio-net/virtio-pci.. (aka alacrity vm vs traditional kvm/qemu).. this includes some pretty sensational(ist?) performance graphs: here.
There are lots of details (and details do matter) but the first-order issue can probably be summed up thusly, from Avi Kivity on lklm:
Perhaps context switching isn't such a minor detail afterall.
There are lots of details (and details do matter) but the first-order issue can probably be summed up thusly, from Avi Kivity on lklm:
The current conjecture is that ioq outperforms virtio because the host side of ioq is implemented in the host kernel, while the host side of virtio is implemented in userspace.
Perhaps context switching isn't such a minor detail afterall.
Labels:
algorithms,
characterization,
ip,
performance,
virtualization
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)