Open Stack

Thanks for sharing Julio. It seems like overall the numbers look better
with QEMU 4.


On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 8:36 AM Montes, Julio <julio.montes at intel.com>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> In order to reduce the noise, I re-ran the tests in a new no-GUI system.
> In the case of QEMU4+PVH the boot time is a little bit better but the
> memory
> footprint is bigger than qemu4 and qemu-lite. Here the results
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2019-05-29 at 11:07 +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 07:21:38PM +0000, Montes, Julio wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2019-05-28 at 12:10 -0700, Maran Wilson wrote:
>
> On 5/28/2019 11:54 AM, Whaley, Graham wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dr. David Alan Gilbert [mailto:dgilbert at redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 7:40 PM
> To: Montes, Julio <julio.montes at intel.com>; pbonzini at redhat.com
> Cc: kata-dev at lists.katacontainers.io
> Subject: Re: [kata-dev] QEMU 4 and QEMU-lite
>
> * Montes, Julio (julio.montes at intel.com) wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2019-05-28 at 18:19 +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert
> wrote:
>
> * Montes, Julio (julio.montes at intel.com) wrote:
>
> Hi kata-folks
>
> One of the topics in today's agent was QEMU 4 and the work
> that we
> are doing to support it in Kata Containers.
> I ran the boot time and memory footprint metrics in my
> workstation
> to compare QEMU 4 vs QEMU-lite (2.11).
> Here the results.
>
> Feel free to comment and raise your concerns about QEMU 4.
>
>
> So that looks pretty nice for QEMU 4; at least as fast and in
> the noise on the memory usage?
>
>
> yeah - IMO QEMU 4 has a good performance and new features, it's
> a good
> hypervisor for Kata Containers.
>
>
> Great!  Please keep running these tests to make sure we don't
> regress in
> future versions (especially on our soft-freezes etc so we can
> spot
> them before the next release.
>
>
> We do have a 'metrics CI' running on Kata, that in theory would
> detect any major (roughly
> +/- 5%) shifts - but, that would only happen when Kata updates the
> version of Qemu it is tracking...
> And, yes, we will almost definitely have to tweak that CI to
> account for the new numbers when we land
> The qemu4 PR ...
>
>
> Just curious about whether you are providing the uncompressed kernel
> image in these Qemu 4 tests or not. Qemu 4.0 supports booting the
> uncompressed kernel binary in order to reduce boot time (if the
> kernel
>
>
> \o/ interesting I will try, thanks.
>
>
> As Maran, I'm also curious about a comparison with the new QEMU 4.0
> feature to boot uncompressed kernel binary.
>
> Here you can find some useful information (I hope :)):
> https://gist.github.com/stefano-garzarella/7b7e17e75add20abd1c42fb496cc6504
>
> Thanks,
> Stefano
>
> _______________________________________________
> kata-dev mailing list
> kata-dev at lists.katacontainers.io
> http://lists.katacontainers.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kata-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.katacontainers.io/pipermail/kata-dev/attachments/20190529/50d1ae04/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: p2.png
Type: image/png
Size: 80104 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.katacontainers.io/pipermail/kata-dev/attachments/20190529/50d1ae04/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: p1.png
Type: image/png
Size: 47885 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.katacontainers.io/pipermail/kata-dev/attachments/20190529/50d1ae04/attachment-0003.png>