|
From: | Uri Lublin |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] ram_save_live: add a no-progress convergence rule |
Date: | Wed, 20 May 2009 19:56:57 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b2 |
On 05/19/2009 09:17 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Glauber Costa wrote:On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 05:59:14PM +0300, Dor Laor wrote:We can also make it configurable using the monitor migrate command. For example: migrate -d -no_progress -threshold=x tcp:....it can be done, but it fits better as a different monitor command anthony, do you have any strong opinions here, or is this scheme acceptable?Threshold is a bad metric. There's no way to choose a right number. If we were going to have a means to support metrics-based forced convergence (and I really think this belongs in libvirt) I'd rather see something based on bandwidth or wall clock time. Let me put it this way, why 50? What were the guidelines for choosing that number and how would you explain what number a user should choose?
I've changed the threshold of the first convergence rule, to 50 from 10. Why 10 ? For this rule the threshold (number of dirty pages) and the number of bytes to transfer are equivalent.
50 pages is about 200K, which can be still sent quickly.I've added debug messages and noticed we never hit a number smaller than 10 (excluding 0). The truth is there were very little number of runs with less than 50 dirty pages too. I don't mind leaving it at 10 (should be configurable too).
For the second migration convergence rule I've set the limit to 10, as it seems much larger than what I've needed (all the runs I've made a number of 2-4 no-progress iterations was good enough, as it seems to have a repetitive behavior later), but I've enlarged it "just in case". No real research work was done here.
Note that a no-progress iteration depends on both network bandwidth and guest actions.
Regards, Uri.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |