From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 2 20:29:48 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ADB81065688; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 20:29:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=julian=27733b6d4@elischer.org) Received: from smtp-outbound.ironport.com (smtp-outbound.ironport.com [63.251.108.112]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61D308FC1B; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 20:29:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=julian=27733b6d4@elischer.org) Received: from jelischer-laptop.sfo.ironport.com (HELO julian-mac.elischer.org) ([10.251.22.38]) by smtp-outbound.ironport.com with ESMTP; 02 Feb 2009 12:16:05 -0800 Message-ID: <4987548A.7000609@elischer.org> Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:16:10 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD virtualization mailing list , FreeBSD Net References: <498414E5.7020904@elischer.org> <4984241B.5010103@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <4984241B.5010103@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: Vimage globals vs structures measurements. X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:29:49 -0000 Julian Elischer wrote: > Julian Elischer wrote: >> >> anyone who has commands and args for their favourite >> thing the'd like me to test... send it in.. >> >> >> so far using ttcp I have seem no measureable difference. >> >> but I have more tests to do of course.. >> >> for example throughput with small packets with ttcp (KB/Sec).... >> >> >> x VIMAGE_GLOBALS >> + NO_VIMAGE_GLOBALS >> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | + xx | >> | + xxx + | >> | + xxx x ++++ | >> | x + x + + xxxxxxx +++++ | >> |x + ++ xx xxx + ++++xxx x x x +++++ ***xxxxx ++++++++| >> | |_____________A______M______| | >> | |________________AM________________| | >> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ >> N Min Max Median Avg Stddev >> x 40 48016.01 57361.32 56268.06 54915.582 2554.0133 >> + 40 48999.66 59646.59 56261.58 56086.798 3119.1782 >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > as I said before mst of my tests have shown no real change but this one > has the most change I've seen.. it's 160 byte udp packets sent between > two identical machines (both using the same kernel each time). > > > x VIMAGE_GLOBALS > + NO_VIMAGE_GLOBALS > +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ > | + + ++ xx x x | > | + + ++ +x++x +xx x x | > | + + +++ + +*+**x+xxxx x | > | + +++ +++x*++*+**x*x*xx x x x | > | + +*+++++x**+*+**x*x*x*xx x x xx | > | ++++*++++****+*+**x*x****x xxxx xxx | > | + + xx + ++++*++*+****+***********x*xxxxx xxxx x| > |+ +*+++ xx++*+*+*+****+****************x***x*xxx*xx x xx x| > | |__________A__________| | > | |_________A________| | > +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ > N Min Max Median Avg Stddev > x 150 10175.11 11292.11 10763.80 10760.77 200.92124 > + 150 10075.64 11019.12 10591.68 10580.059 172.29227 > Difference at 95.0% confidence > -180.711 +/- 42.3572 > -1.67935% +/- 0.393626% > (Student's t, pooled s = 187.155) > > this one showed a 1.7% slowdown > where the one above showed a half percent speedup > (but not considered significant). > > The first one shown above was TCP with 1500 byte packets on bge 1G > interfaces.. > > more test ideas appreciated... more tests.. this one with iperf... x NO_VIMAGE_GLOBALS + VIMAGE_GLOBALS +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | + x x x | | + + x x x x | | + + + + x x x x | | + + + + x x x x | | + + + + + x x x x x | | + + + + * x x x x x x | | + + + + * x * x x x x | | + + + + + * * * x x x x | | + + + + + + * * * x x x x | | + + + + + + + * * * x x x x | | + + + + + + + * * * * x x x x x | | + + + + + + * * * * * * x x x x | | + + + + + + * * * * * * x x x x | | + + + + + + * * * * * * * * x * x x | |x + + + + * * * * * * * * * * * * x x x| | |________A_________| | | |________MA_________| | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ N Min Max Median Avg Stddev x 120 418 441 435 435.025 3.4089908 + 120 423 438 429 429.51667 3.4664862 Difference at 95.0% confidence -5.50833 +/- 0.869898 -1.26621% +/- 0.199965% (Student's t, pooled s = 3.43786) bigger is better... In this case we see that NO_VIMAGE_GLOBALS is better. Over several iterations I have come to the conclusion that other factors are overwhelming this change and that the effect of clustering all the 'global' variables together into a single global structure is negligible. If I can get some confirmation of this by others then the next step would be to simply remove the VIMAGE_GLOBALS option and all the global variables it covers. At least that's what seems next to me.. see: http://wiki.freebsd.org/Image/Notes200808DevSummit > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 4 19:00:13 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEF2D10656CA for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:00:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net) Received: from mail.cksoft.de (mail.cksoft.de [62.111.66.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D2098FC08 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:00:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net) Received: from localhost (amavis.str.cksoft.de [192.168.74.71]) by mail.cksoft.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 375B241C705; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:50:06 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cksoft.de Received: from mail.cksoft.de ([62.111.66.27]) by localhost (amavis.str.cksoft.de [192.168.74.71]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pDFSOKXsw7iZ; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:50:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.cksoft.de (Postfix, from userid 66) id DE0A141C733; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:50:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net (maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net [10.111.66.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA7AD4448E6; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:48:53 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:48:53 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" X-X-Sender: bz@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net To: Julian Elischer In-Reply-To: <4987548A.7000609@elischer.org> Message-ID: <20090204184526.I93725@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <498414E5.7020904@elischer.org> <4984241B.5010103@elischer.org> <4987548A.7000609@elischer.org> X-OpenPGP-Key: 0x14003F198FEFA3E77207EE8D2B58B8F83CCF1842 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: FreeBSD Net , FreeBSD virtualization mailing list Subject: Re: Vimage globals vs structures measurements. X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 19:00:14 -0000 On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Julian Elischer wrote: Hi, > If I can get some confirmation of this by others then > the next step would be to simply remove the VIMAGE_GLOBALS option > and all the global variables it covers. > > At least that's what seems next to me.. no, the next step is to bring in the beaf (last step). I think we had clearly decided (somewhen, somewho) that we want one version with all three options at the same time. Once we are confident, hopefully after a few days at that point, VIMAGE_GLOBALS will go away. So please do not rape that out. In two months there were no real accidents wrt. VIMAGE_GLOBALS even with all the larger changes that went in. I think it's safe to keep them another 4-6 weeks. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb The greatest risk is not taking one. From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 4 19:15:08 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62FFF106566B; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:15:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bz@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.cksoft.de (mail.cksoft.de [62.111.66.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150C38FC19; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:15:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bz@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (amavis.str.cksoft.de [192.168.74.71]) by mail.cksoft.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BABD41C730; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 20:00:06 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cksoft.de Received: from mail.cksoft.de ([62.111.66.27]) by localhost (amavis.str.cksoft.de [192.168.74.71]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tROmd48uLAWT; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 20:00:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.cksoft.de (Postfix, from userid 66) id DF73A41C711; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 20:00:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net (maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net [10.111.66.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 625DF4448E6; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:59:07 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:59:07 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" X-X-Sender: bz@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net To: Julian Elischer In-Reply-To: <20090204184526.I93725@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: <20090204185656.B93725@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <498414E5.7020904@elischer.org> <4984241B.5010103@elischer.org> <4987548A.7000609@elischer.org> <20090204184526.I93725@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> X-OpenPGP-Key: 0x14003F198FEFA3E77207EE8D2B58B8F83CCF1842 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: FreeBSD Net , FreeBSD virtualization mailing list Subject: Re: Vimage globals vs structures measurements. X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 19:15:09 -0000 On Wed, 4 Feb 2009, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Julian Elischer wrote: > > Hi, > >> If I can get some confirmation of this by others then >> the next step would be to simply remove the VIMAGE_GLOBALS option >> and all the global variables it covers. >> >> At least that's what seems next to me.. > > no, the next step is to bring in the beaf (last step). ... beef ... anyway. The indirection, the real virtualization, the multiple images, ... you count my typos;) > I think we had clearly decided (somewhen, somewho) that we want one > version with all three options at the same time. > Once we are confident, hopefully after a few days at that point, > VIMAGE_GLOBALS will go away. > > So please do not rape that out. In two months there were no real > accidents wrt. VIMAGE_GLOBALS even with all the larger changes that > went in. I think it's safe to keep them another 4-6 weeks. > > /bz > > -- Bjoern A. Zeeb The greatest risk is not taking one. From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 7 21:30:23 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E86106567A for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2009 21:30:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ragnar@gatorhole.com) Received: from svosch.gatorhole.com (lonn.org [213.136.43.225]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9000E8FC12 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2009 21:30:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ragnar@gatorhole.com) Received: from 90-227-60-174-no53.tbcn.telia.com (90-227-60-174-no53.tbcn.telia.com [90.227.60.174]) (Authenticated sender: ragnar@gatorhole.com) by svosch.gatorhole.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 204F4BE589 for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2009 22:16:42 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <498DF945.3000702@gatorhole.com> Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 22:12:37 +0100 From: Ragnar Lonn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: More open sockets with vimages? X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 21:30:24 -0000 Hi all, I am a longtime (well, since 2004 or so) vimage user. It's really nice to see this great stuff getting into the main branch! I have a quick question for the list: I want to be able to have a machine handle a *lot* of open network connections. Many systems have various issues with this, but I thought that if FreeBSD's vimages might be able to get around the problem. Is it possible to have more open network sockets using multiple vimages, than it is on a FreeBSD without vimage? Are sockets still a global resource, or do they get multiplied with each vimage? I apologize if this is a stupid question, I haven't been using FreeBSD+vimages in a while (although I hope to change that soon!) Cheers, /Ragnar From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 7 22:42:09 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1B74106564A for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2009 22:42:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=julian=2829cc7bb@elischer.org) Received: from smtp-outbound.ironport.com (smtp-outbound.ironport.com [63.251.108.112]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5CF78FC0C for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2009 22:42:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=julian=2829cc7bb@elischer.org) Received: from unknown (HELO julian-mac.elischer.org) ([10.251.60.49]) by smtp-outbound.ironport.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2009 14:13:44 -0800 Message-ID: <498E0797.4040002@elischer.org> Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 14:13:43 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ragnar Lonn References: <498DF945.3000702@gatorhole.com> In-Reply-To: <498DF945.3000702@gatorhole.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More open sockets with vimages? X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 22:42:10 -0000 Ragnar Lonn wrote: > Hi all, > > I am a longtime (well, since 2004 or so) vimage user. It's really nice > to see this great stuff getting into the main branch! > > I have a quick question for the list: I want to be able to have a > machine handle a *lot* of open network connections. Many systems have > various issues with this, but I thought that if FreeBSD's vimages might > be able to get around the problem. Is it possible to have more open > network sockets using multiple vimages, than it is on a FreeBSD without > vimage? Are sockets still a global resource, or do they get multiplied > with each vimage? > > I apologize if this is a stupid question, I haven't been using > FreeBSD+vimages in a while (although I hope to change that soon!) sockets are a global resource that are assigned to vimages. However the amount of sockets available are tunable. how many are we talking about here? > > Cheers, > > /Ragnar > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"