Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2024 09:56:33 +0100 From: Jo Durchholz <jo@durchholz.org> To: "freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Best way to have a FreeBSD VM for automated testing? Message-ID: <7e5bc32c-dddb-4d33-96e9-99a955eed572@durchholz.org> In-Reply-To: <DACDE582-C124-42EE-9CAF-76C3F46F6B4E@exonetric.com> References: <163e57a9-0b61-414c-a8f7-109f5ac90f69@durchholz.org> <DACDE582-C124-42EE-9CAF-76C3F46F6B4E@exonetric.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24.02.24 07:41, Mark Blackman wrote: > > If an Amazon firecracker environment works for you, there’s > https://www.freebsd.org/status/report-2023-04-2023-06/boot-performance/ Oh. Thanks. 20 ms boot time sounds good enough to me :-D ... aww, the PDF link to the slides is broken :-( https://wiki.freebsd.org/BootTime (Colin Percival) works and reports ~8 seconds on FreeBSD 14.0. http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2021-08-12-EC2-boot-time-benchmarking.html (again, Colin Percival 2021) tells me that the best boot-to-TCP time was about 1.23 s, while typical boot times would be around 10-15 s. Those 8 seconds are actually good, unless the competition has sped up as well :-) (This benchmarks just TCP availability, I don't know or how much needs to be added for ssh availability.) There's a conclusion here: While those improvements are awesome, 8 seconds are nowhere near the do-not-disrupt-developer-workflow threshold, so the VM snapshot it will be. Oh. Wait. These links talk about FreeBSD's boot time. I don't know how this relates to Firecracker. OTOH Firecracker is very new, so I'm somewhat reluctant to jump that bandwagon anyway. > of course, there’s more to booting than the kernel. Definitely. In my own testing, something that vaguely sounded like a mail subsystem had a full minute-long wait. Some tweaking will be needed to get rid of that behaviour. I'm comfortable with that, though not with having to put those tweaks into a setup script and keeping it up-to-date with every new FreeBSD version. I haven't seen an OS or distro that does not have this kind of problem though, so I'll just have to live with that. > I’d guess some of those improvements could apply to more generic VM hypervisors too. Probably, but as much as I like exploring rabbit holes, I already have a too-long list of these to add yet another one :-) Regards, Jo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7e5bc32c-dddb-4d33-96e9-99a955eed572>