Multipass already has sensible defaults, so this is an optional step. This document demonstrates how to choose, set up, and manage the drivers behind Multipass. Configure where Multipass stores external data.Use a different terminal from the system icon.Authenticate clients with the Multipass service.This entry was posted in English, GPUL, Igalia, Software on Jby berto. Of course there are many other virtualization programs that I did not use in this test: OpenVZ, Xen, Linux-VServer, VirtualBox, VMWare… I expect OpenVZ and Linux-VServer to perform more or less like native mode, but I’d really like to know about the other ones.Īnd that’s all!! I hope that this article is useful to anyone and of course comments are welcome.Only recent processors have this kind of functionality (mine has) so it doesn’t make sense to use it if your processor is older. KVM requires hardware support to work properly.KQEMU didn’t even boot if I tried to use the -kernel-kqemu flag.I made some tests comparing QEMU performance with qcow and raw disk images.QEMU and KVM have a -smp flag to emulate a machine with several CPUs but neither one boots properly with that flag enabled. All the other virtualization solutions perform (as expected) a bit slower when compiling with -j2. Native mode is the only one that benefits from parallel compilation.Some extra remarks that I’d like to point out: Interactive usage, it doesn’t feel that slow. Of course in this mode (and unlike the other solutions tested) it emulates the CPU so it has to be obviously an order of magnitude slower than the rest, but still in everyday, Of course they’re very different programs, but you get what I mean.Īnd last but not least, I was really amazed on how slow is QEMU with no helper module. I also expected KQEMU to perform a bit better… unlike KVM, this one is even slower than plain User-mode linux running in skas0 mode (that doesn’t require any kernel module nor patch). ![]() Regarding User-mode Linux I was a bit surprised that the skas0 mode did not perform much worse than the skas3 mode. KVM performed a bit worse than I expected but it’s still faster than any of the the other ones and reasonably close to native compilation. Click on the images to enlarge them.Īs expected, native compilation is the best and making use of both cpu cores is really worth it. Both were constructed using the same data, but the latter omits QEMU as its performance is not comparable to the others. Here’s a couple of charts showing the results. ![]() Here are the results of the test ordered by total compilation time (best results are shown first). User-mode Linux 2.6.17.13 in skas0 mode.The host and the guests used basically the same software.Īs the machine has a dual-core processor I compiled the same kernel twice: first with a classic make and then with two simultaneous jobs (‘ make -j2‘).īesides compiling the kernel in the host I tested the following virtualization software: I know it’s not an elaborate test but at least it involves both computation and I/O so the results shold be fairly realistic.Īll the tools used were the ones that come with Debian 4.0 etch x86 ( not x86_64): gcc 4.1, bzip2 1.0.3, etc. The test was very simple: unpacking the source code of Linux 2.6.21.1 (from a. ![]() This test is far from perfect but I think that at least you can get a basic idea of how all these virtualization techniques perform. I have been making some quick tests comparing the performance of some different popular virtualization programs.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |