Xensummit2009 Io Virtualization Performance

IO Virtualization PerformanceHUANG Zhiteng ([email protected])

SoftwareServices&

group

Agenda

• IO Virtualization Overview• Software solution

• Hardware solution

• IO performance Trend

• How IO Virtualization Performed in Micro Benchmark• Network

• Disk

• Performance in Enterprise Workloads• Web Server: PV, VT-d and Native performance

• Database: VT-d vs. Native performance

• Consolidated Workload: SR-IOV benefit

• Direct IO (VT-d) Overhead Analysis

2

SoftwareServices&

group

IO Virtualization Overview

3

VM0

VMN

Software Solutions:Two solution we are familiar with on Xen:•Emulated Devices – QEMU

Good compatibility, very poor performance•Para-Virtualized Devices

Need driver support in guest, provides optimized performance compared to QEMU.

Both require participation of Dom0 (driver domain) to serve an VM IO request.

IO Virtualization enables VMs to utilize Input/Output resources of hardware platform. In this session, we cover network and storage.

SoftwareServices&

group

IO Virtualization Overview – Hardware Solution

4

• VMDq (Virtual Machine Device Queue)• Separate Rx & Tx queue pairs of NIC for each VM, Software “switch”. Requires specific OS and VMM support.

• Direct IO (VT-d)•Improved IO performance through direct assignment of a I/O device to an unmodified or paravirtualized VM.

• SR-IOV (Single Root I/O Virtualization)•Changes to I/O device silicon to support multiple PCI device ID’s, thus one I/O device can support multiple direct assigned guests. Requires VT-d.

Offer 3 kinds of H/W assists to accelerate IO.

Single or combination of technology can be used to address various usages.

Network Only

VM Exclusively

Owns Device

One Device, Multiple Virtual Function

SoftwareServices&

group

IO Virtualization Overview - Trend

5

Solid State Drive (SSD)Provides hundreds MB/s bandwidth and >10,000 IOPS for single devices*.

PCIe 2.0Doubles the bit rate from 2.5GT/s to 5.0GT/s.

40Gb/s and 100Gb/s EthernetScheduled to release Draft 3.0 in Nov. 2009, Standard Approval in

2010**.

Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE)Unified IO consolidates network (IP) and storage (SAN) to single

connection.

Much Higher throughput, denser IO capacity.

* http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3403

** See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Gigabit_Ethernet

SoftwareServices&

group

4.68

8.479.54

19

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

02468

101214161820

HVM + PV driver PV Guest HVM + VT-d 30VMs+SR-IOV

Ban

dw

idth

(G

b/s

)

iperf: Transmiting Performance

perf cpu%

1.81x1.13x

How IO Virtualization Performed in Micro Benchmark – Network

6

1.46

3.10

9.43

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0

2

4

6

8

10

HVM + PV driver PV Guest HVM + VT-d

Ban

dw

idth

(G

b/s

)

iperf: Receiving Performance

perf cpu%

2.12x

3.04x

Iperf with 10Gb/s Ethernet NIC were

used to benchmark TCP bandwidth of

different device models(*).

Thanks to VT-d, VM can easily

achieved 10GbE line-rate in both cases

with relatively much lower resource

consumption.

Also with SR-IOV, we were able to get

19Gb/s transmitting performance with

30VFs assigned to 30 VMs.

* HVM+ VT-d uses 2.6.27 kernel while PV guest and HVM+PV driver uses 2.6.18.* We turned off multiqueue support in NIC driver of HVM+VT-d due 2.6.18 kernel doesn’t have multi TX queue support. So for iperf test, there was only one TX/RX queue in the NIC and all interrupts are sent to one physical core only.* ITR (Interrupt Throttle Rate) was set to 8000 for all cases.

SR-IOV Dual-Port 10GbE NIC

SoftwareServices&

group

How IO Virtualization Performed in Micro Benchmark – Network (cont.)

7

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

PV Guest 1 queue HVM+VT-d 1 queue HVM+VT-d 4 queue

0.33

3.90

8.15

Mill

ion

Pac

ket

Pe

r Se

con

d (

mp

p/s

)

Packet Transmitting Performance

11.7x

2.1x

Packet Transmitting performance is another

essential aspect of high throughput network.

Using Linux kernel packet generator(pktgen)

with small UDP packets (128 Byte), HVM+VT-d

can send over 4 million packets/s with 1 TX

queue and >8 million packets/s with 4 TX

queue.

PV performance was far behind due to its long

packet processing path.

SoftwareServices&

group

How IO Virtualization Performed in Micro Benchmark – Disk IO

8

1,711

4,911

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

PV Guest HVM + VT-d

Ban

dw

idth

(M

B/s

)

IOmeter: Disk Bandwidth

2.9x

7,056

18,725

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

0

4,000

8,000

12,000

16,000

20,000

PV Guest HVM + VT-d

IO p

er

Seco

nd

IOmeter: Disk IOPS

2.7x

We measured disk bandwidth with sequential

read and IOPS with random read to check block

device performance.

HVM+VT-d out-perform PV guest to ~3.0x in

both tests.

SoftwareServices&

group

Performance in Enterprise Workloads – Web Server

9

5,000

9,000

24,500

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

HVM + PV driver PV guest HVM+ VT-d

Sess

ion

s

Web Server Performance

performance CPU utilization

1.8x

2.7x

Web Server simulates a support website where connected users browse and download files.

We measures maximum simultaneous user sessions that web server can support while satisfying the QoS criteria.

Only HVM+VT-d was able to push server’s

utilization to ~100%. PV solution hit some

bottleneck that they failed to pass QoS while

utilization is still <70%.

SoftwareServices&

group

Performance in Enterprise Workloads – Database

10

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Native HVM + VT-d

11,44310,762

Qp

hH

Decision Support DB Performnce

94.06%

0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

Native HVM + VT-d Storage & NIC HVM + VT-d Storage

199.71 184.08

127.56

OLTP DB Performance

92.2%

63.9%

Decision Support DB requires high disk bandwidth while OLTP DB is IOPS bound and requires certain

network bandwidth to connect to clients.

HVM+VT-d combination achieved > 90% of native performance in these two DB workloads.

SoftwareServices&

group

Performance in Enterprise Workloads – Consolidation with SR-IOV

11

1.49x

Workload consolidates multiple tiles of servers to run on same physical machine. One tile consists of 1 instance of Web Server, 1 J2EE AppServer and 1 Mail Server, altogether 6 VMs.

It’s a complex workload, which consumes CPU, memory, disk and network.

PV solution could only supports 4 tiles on two socket server and fails to pass QoS of Web Server criteria before it saturates CPU.

As a pilot, we enabled SR-IOV NIC for Web Server. This brought >49% performance increase also allowed system to support two more tiles (12 VMs).

1.00

1.49

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

PV Guest HVM+SR-IOV

Rat

io o

f P

erf

orm

ance

SR-IOV Benefit: Consolidated Workload

Ratio System Utilization

SoftwareServices&

group

Direct IO (VT-d) Overhead

12

6.37%

4.73%

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

SPECWeb

VT-d: XEN Cycles Breakdown

Interrupt Windows

INTR

APIC ACCESS

IO INSTRUCTION

APIC access and interrupt delivery consumed the most cycles. (Note that some amount of interrupts arrive when CPU is HLT thus they are not

counted.)

In various workloads, we’ve seen Xen brings in about 5~12% overhead, which is being mainly spent on serving interrupts. Intel OTC team has developed patch set to eliminate part of Xen software overhead. Check out Xiaowei’s session for details.

5.94

11.878

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Disk Bandwidth Web Server

Uti

lizat

ion

(%

)

VT-d cases: Utilization Breakdown

Dom0

Xen

Guest Kernel

Guest User

Web Server

SoftwareServices&

group

CREDIT

Great thanks to DUAN, Ronghui and XIANG, Kai for providing data of VT-d network and SR-IOV.

13

SoftwareServices&

group

QUESTIONS?

SSG/SSD/SPA/PRC Scalability Lab14

SoftwareServices&

group

BACKUP

SSG/SSD/SPA/PRC Scalability Lab15

SoftwareServices&

group

Configuration

16

Hardware Configuration:

Intel® Nehalem-EP Server System

CPU Info:

2 socket Nehalem 2.66 GHZ with 8MB LLC Cache, C0 stepping.

Hardware Prefetches OFF

Turbo mode OFF, EIST OFF.

NIC device

Intel 10Gb XF SR NIC (82598EB)—2 single port NIC installed on

machine and one dual port NIC installed on server.

RAID bus controller:

LSI Logic MegaRAID SAS 8888elp x3

DISK array x6 (each with 70GB X 12 SAS HDD).

Memory Info

64GB memory (16x 4GB DDR3 1066MHz) , 32GB on each node.

Software Configuration:

Xen C/S:18771 for network/disk micro benchmark, 19591 for SR-IOV test

Test Case VM Configuration

Network Micro benchmark

4 vCPU, 64GB memory

Storage Micro Benchmark

2 vCPU, 12GB memory

Web Server4 vCPU, 64GB memory

Database 4 vCPU, 12GB memory

17 SSG/SSD/SPA/PRC Scalability Lab