Hi Martin,
On 05.03.2012 17:13, Martin Mailand wrote:
> Am 10.02.2012 15:36, schrieb Dongsu Park:
> >Recently I observed performance regression regarding virtio-blk,
> >especially different IO bandwidths between qemu-kvm 0.14.1 and 1.0.
> >So I want to share the benchmark
Hi Stefan,
see below.
On 21.02.2012 17:27, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Dongsu Park
> wrote:
..
> I'm not sure if O_DIRECT and Linux AIO to /dev/ram0 is a good idea.
> At least with tmpfs O_DIRECT does not even work - which kind of makes
>
Hi Rusty,
On 13.02.2012 10:25, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:36:39 +0100, Dongsu Park
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Recently I observed performance regression regarding virtio-blk,
> > especially different IO bandwidths between qemu-kvm 0.14.1 and 1
Hi Stefan,
see below.
On 13.02.2012 11:57, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Dongsu Park
> wrote:
> > Now I'm running benchmarks with both qemu-kvm 0.14.1 and 1.0.
> >
> > - Sequential read (Running inside guest)
> > # fio -nam
Hi,
Recently I observed performance regression regarding virtio-blk,
especially different IO bandwidths between qemu-kvm 0.14.1 and 1.0.
So I want to share the benchmark results, and ask you what the reason
would be.
1. Test condition
- On host, ramdisk-backed block device (/dev/ram0)
- qemu-k
