From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 25 17:45:56 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5975B843; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 17:45:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.digiware.nl (unknown [IPv6:2001:4cb8:90:ffff::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18267232; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 17:45:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rack1.digiware.nl (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 957BC153448; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:45:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at digiware.nl Received: from smtp.digiware.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by rack1.digiware.nl (rack1.digiware.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3TWFPszzpxVh; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:45:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.10.9] (vaio [192.168.10.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.digiware.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9A92153416; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:45:43 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <544BE1CA.6010300@digiware.nl> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:45:46 +0200 From: Willem Jan Withagen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Grehan Subject: Re: Bhyve building kernel....Just an observation References: <544A083B.50007@digiware.nl> <544ADF08.4020706@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <544ADF08.4020706@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: virtualization@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 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, 25 Oct 2014 17:45:56 -0000 On 25-10-2014 1:21, Peter Grehan wrote: > Hi Willem, >> And then booted a 10-STABLE bhyve VM with all memory and processors >> assigned to the VM. So all the power could be available to the VM. > > You'll most likely want to keep some memory and processor resources > available for the host system. ZFS will need memory for ARC and CPU for > operations - if these aren't available, it will compete with bhyve's use > of CPUs, and there will be times when these are conflicting. Hi Peter, Thanx for the hint. The assumption that the performance difference is, is Disk-IO is at least not very obvious from the simple test. Both tests were running from a 6Gb tmpfs Dom0 had 16Gb Ram, and I limited DomU to 12G Ram. Tested it once in Dom0, and it takes ~ 5Gb of tmp store. It holds src and obj, and I see no disk traffic while building. Building kernel with just the default tmpfs (all avail mem + swap) takes 6:30 (zfs with ssd's) versus 5:30 (tmpfs) Running in DomU is get about the same difference: with ahci-hd/zfs backing 9:30 with tmpfs 8:30 So I would think the difference is not really in the IO-performance. But as usual: All other opinions more than appreciated. --WjW