The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.03 - July-Sept. (2013 vol.6)
pp: 314-329
Xing Pu , Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing
Ling Liu , Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Yiduo Mei , Xi'An Jiaotong University, Shanxi
Sankaran Sivathanu , Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Younggyun Koh , Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Calton Pu , Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Yuanda Cao , Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing
ABSTRACT
User-perceived performance continues to be the most important QoS indicator in cloud-based data centers today. Effective allocation of virtual machines (VMs) to handle both CPU intensive and I/O intensive workloads is a crucial performance management capability in virtualized clouds. Although a fair amount of researches have dedicated to measuring and scheduling jobs among VMs, there still lacks of in-depth understanding of performance factors that impact the efficiency and effectiveness of resource multiplexing and scheduling among VMs. In this paper, we present the experimental research on performance interference in parallel processing of CPU-intensive and network-intensive workloads on Xen virtual machine monitor (VMM). Based on our study, we conclude with five key findings which are critical for effective performance management and tuning in virtualized clouds. First, colocating network-intensive workloads in isolated VMs incurs high overheads of switches and events in Dom0 and VMM. Second, colocating CPU-intensive workloads in isolated VMs incurs high CPU contention due to fast I/O processing in I/O channel. Third, running CPU-intensive and network-intensive workloads in conjunction incurs the least resource contention, delivering higher aggregate performance. Fourth, performance of network-intensive workload is insensitive to CPU assignment among VMs, whereas adaptive CPU assignment among VMs is critical to CPU-intensive workload. The more CPUs pinned on Dom0 the worse performance is achieved by CPU-intensive workload. Last, due to fast I/O processing in I/O channel, limitation on grant table is a potential bottleneck in Xen. We argue that identifying the factors that impact the total demand of exchanged memory pages is important to the in-depth understanding of interference costs in Dom0 and VMM.
INDEX TERMS
Interference, Throughput, Measurement, Virtual machine monitors, Hardware, Resource management, Servers, virtualization, Cloud computing, performance measurement
CITATION
Xing Pu, Ling Liu, Yiduo Mei, Sankaran Sivathanu, Younggyun Koh, Calton Pu, Yuanda Cao, "Who Is Your Neighbor: Net I/O Performance Interference in Virtualized Clouds", IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol.6, no. 3, pp. 314-329, July-Sept. 2013, doi:10.1109/TSC.2012.2
REFERENCES
[1] P. Apparao, S. Makineni, and D. Newell, "Characterization of Network Processing Overheads in Xen," Proc. Second Int'l Workshop Virtualization Technology in Distributed Computing (VTDC '06), pp. 2-9, Nov. 2006.
[2] P. Barham, B. Dragovic, K.A. Fraser, S. Hand, T. Harris, A. Ho, E. Kotsovinos, A. Madhavapeddy, R. Neugebauer, I. Pratt, and A. Warfield, "Xen 2002," Technical Report UCAM-CL-TR-553, Univ. of Cambridge, Jan. 2003.
[3] P. Barham, B. Dragovic, K. Fraser, S. Hand, T. Harris, A. Ho, R. Neugebauer, I. Pratt, and A. Warfield, "Xen and the Art of Virtualization," Proc. Ninth ACM Symp. Operating Systems Principles (SOSP '03), pp. 164-177, Oct. 2003.
[4] L. Cherkasova and R. Gardner, "Measuring CPU Overhead for I/O Processing in the Xen Virtual Machine Monitor," Proc. USENIX Ann. Technical Conf. (ATC '05), pp. 387-390, Apr. 2005.
[5] L. Cherkasova, D. Gupta, and A. Vahdat, "Comparison of the Three CPU Schedulers in Xen," Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Rev. (PER '07), pp. 42-51, Sept. 2007.
[6] K. Fraser, S. Hand, R. Neugebauer, I. Pratt, A. Warfield, and M. Williamson, "Reconstructing I/O," Technical Report UCAM-CL-TR-596, Univ. of Cambridge, Aug. 2004.
[7] K. Fraser, S. Hand, R. Neugebauer, I. Pratt, A. Warfield, and M. Williams, "Safe Hardware Access with the Xen Virtual Machine Monitor," Proc. Operating System and Architectural Support for the on Demand IT Infrastructure (OASIS '04), pp. 1-10, Oct. 2004.
[8] D. Gupta, R. Gardner, and L. Cherkasova, "XenMon: QoS Monitoring and Performance Profiling Tool," Technical Report HPL-2005-187, HP Laboratories, Oct. 2005.
[9] D. Gupta, L. Cherkasova, R. Gardner, and A. Vahdat, "Enforcing Performance Isolation across Virtual Machines in Xen," Proc. ACM/IFIP/USENIX Seventh Int'l Middleware Conf. (Middleware '06), pp. 342-362, Nov. 2006.
[10] T. Hatori and H. Oi, "Implementation and Analysis of Large Receive Offload in a Virtualized System," Proc. Virtualization Performance: Analysis, Characterization, and Tools (VPACT '08), Apr. 2008.
[11] M. Kallahalla, M. Uysal, R. Swaminathan, D. Lowell, M. Wray, T. Christian, N. Edwards, C. Dalton, and F. Gittler, "SoftUDC: A Software-Based Data Center for Utility Computing," IEEE Computer, vol. 37, no. 11, pp. 38-46, Nov. 2004.
[12] Y. Koh, R. Knauerhase, P. Brett, M. Bowman, Z. Wen, and C. Pu, "An Analysis of Performance Interference Effects in Virtual Environments," Proc. IEEE Symp. Performance Analysis of Systems and Software (ISPASS '07), pp. 200-209, Apr. 2007.
[13] D. Mosberger and T. Jin, "httperf—A Tool for Measuring Web Server Performance," Performance Evaluation Rev., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 31-37, Dec. 1998.
[14] A. Menon, J. Santos, and Y. Turner, "Diagnosing Performance Overheads in the Xen Virtual Machine Environment," Proc. ACM/USENIX Conf. Virtual Execution Environments (VEE '05), pp. 13-23, June 2005.
[15] A. Menon, A.L. Cox, and W. Zwaenepoel, "Optimizing Network Virtualization in Xen," Proc. USENIX Ann. Technical Conf. (ATC '06), pp. 15-28, June 2006.
[16] K. Mansley, G. Law, D. Riddoch, G. Barzini, N. Turton, and S. Pope, "Getting 10 Gb/s from Xen: Safe and Fast Device Access from Unprivileged Domains," Proc. Euro-Par Conf. Parallel Processing (Euro-Par), pp. 224-233, Dec. 2007.
[17] Y. Mei, L. Liu, X. Pu, and S. Sivathanu, "Performance Measurements and Analysis of Network I/O Applications in Virtualized Cloud," Proc. IEEE Int'l Conf. Cloud Computing (CLOUD '10), pp. 59-66, July 2010.
[18] H. Oi and F. Nakajima, "Performance Analysis of Large Receive Offload in a Xen Virtualized System," Proc. Computer Eng. and Technology (ICCET '09), pp. 475-480, Aug. 2009.
[19] P. Padala, X. Zhu, Z. Wang, S. Singhal, and K. Shin, "Performance Evaluation of Vrtualization Technologies for Server Consolidation," Technical Report HPL-2007-59R1, HP Laboratories, Sept. 2008.
[20] X. Pu, L. Liu, Y. Mei, S. Sivathanu, Y. Koh, and C. Pu, "Understanding Performance Interference of I/O Workload in Virtualized Cloud Environments," Proc. IEEE Int'l Conf. Cloud Computing (CLOUD '10), pp. 51-58, July 2010.
[21] R. Rose, Survey of System Virtualization Techniques. Oregon State Univ., Mar. 2004.
[22] K.K. Ram, J.R. Santos, Y. Turner, A.L. Cox, and S. Rixner, "Achieving 10 Gb/s Using Safe and Transparent Network Interface Virtualization," Proc. ACM/SIGPLAN/SIGOPS Conf. Virtual Execution Environments (VEE '09), pp. 61-70, Mar. 2009.
[23] K.K. Ram, J.R. Santos, and Y. Turner, "Redesigning Xen's Memory Sharing Mechanism for Safe and Efficient I/O Virtualization," Proc. Second Int'l Workshop I/O Virtualization (WIOV '10), pp. 2-9, Mar. 2010.
[24] J.R. Santos, G.J. Janakiraman, and Y. Turner, "Network Optimizations for PV Guests," Proc. Third Xen Summit, Sept. 2006.
[25] J.R. Santos, Y. Turner, G. Janakiraman, and I. Pratt, "Bridging the Gap between Software and Hardware Techniques for I/O Virtualization," Proc. USENIX Ann. Technical Conf. (ATC '08), pp. 29-42, June 2008.
[26] VmWare, http:/www.vmware.com, 2010.
[27] Xen Virtual Machine Moniter, http:/www.xen.org, 2010.
[28] Citrix XenServer, http:/www.citrix.com, 2011.
[29] KVM, http:/www.linux-kvm.org, 2010.
[30] Microsoft Hyper-V, http://www.microsoft.comhyper-v-server, 2011.
[31] Collectl, http:/collectl.sourceforge.net, 2011.
[32] SLAB, http://en.wikipedia.org/wikiSlab_allocation , 2011.
32 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool