From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 28 11:52:03 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A91267B9 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 11:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com [209.85.220.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C88C14C0 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 11:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id fa1so272744pad.14 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 03:52:02 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=IJsFzm05+IHSmHrBa91PSJNGkHtkgkbvXPSVxKvXv/g=; b=fbrEy9t8sF5ILSeCgVdDFANn8egB9VL4VR1AV92KKhaWycPBTryaOp6jM62nONwN4t ++LbFgTpXh7KrHzU53i0sGz7ZjV71C+UwtZoZyt18JJpvnceB4j3XVe16Imm3/E0tGHj PTs087KPZdtqqwF/Q7B7bJg4wi8hgfDzDFAE0diHCENUE3YxSJ0C3sY7ymJ7+Q1kaNW7 xpILcjFk8DZENb79NciLM1VmASfbwk4+5L525pUXWAhZ9VFvXhq5gGDe6bEKb8SUiPBK 4Dvx5aZXECM1/6dRvTLDo+leyUXmtO6E17vtDLdGKwXHTZS+/c7C01caPWlnIJckfH8g N8fA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkx68K2c+pwWpHRJFgtaDktwXvPdklbI/6S0epiaXZh1TFiwsu3qEVH/jd3vOulKKiR/ihn MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.180.200 with SMTP id dq8mr1103154pac.104.1390909922813; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 03:52:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.176.5 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 03:52:02 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [2001:470:28:12b::3] In-Reply-To: <52E7943E.2080908@wasikowski.net> References: <52E7943E.2080908@wasikowski.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 12:52:02 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: BHyVe - ESXi comparison From: Andrea Brancatelli To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C5=81ukasz_W=C4=85sikowski?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 Cc: "freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 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: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 11:52:03 -0000 OK, I changed that, thanks for your feedback, my assumption was something like "with bhyve it took the 106% of the time it took with VMWare", but probably the approach of "bhyve being 6% slower" is clearer. On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:27 PM, =C5=81ukasz W=C4=85sikowski wrote: > W dniu 2014-01-28 12:18, Andrea Brancatelli pisze: > > > We did a very rough comparison betweend BHyVe and VMWare ESXi. Maybe yo= u > > want to give it a read and let me know if I did write a bunch of sh!t := -) > > > > > http://andrea.brancatelli.it/2014/01/28/freebsd-10-0-bhyve-vmware-esxi-5-= 5-comparison/ > > > > I must say I'm very pleased with BHyVe performances! Very good work!! > > > > Thanks for your time. > > You've wrote: > > > BHyVe took 332 seconds > VMWare took 313 seconds > > The difference is about 106.7%. > > I think that the correct conclusion should state: if we assume VMware's > time as a reference than BHyVe was 6.7% slower (not 106.7%). And it > should be 6,41% really :) > > -- > best regards, > Lukasz Wasikowski > --=20 *Andrea BrancatelliSchema 31 S.r.l. - Socio UnicoResponsabile ITROMA - FIRENZE - PALERMO ITALYTel: +39. 06.98.358.472* *Cell: +39 331.2488468Fax: +39. 055.71.880.466Societ=C3=A0 del Gruppo SC31 ITALIA*