Re: Proposal for a regular upstream performance testing

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 09:10:14AM +0100, Lukáš Doktor wrote:
> The problem with those is that we can not simply use travis/gitlab/... 
> machines for running those tests, because we are measuring in-guest actual 
> performance. We can't just stop the time when the machine decides to schedule 
> another container/vm. I briefly checked the public bare-metal offerings like 
> rackspace but these are most probably not sufficient either because (unless 
> I'm wrong) they only give you a machine but it is not guaranteed that it will 
> be the same machine the next time. If we are to compare the results we don't 
> need just the same model, we really need the very same machine. Any change to 
> the machine might lead to a significant difference (disk replacement, even 
> firmware update...).

Do you have a suggested bare metal setup?

I think it's more complicated than having a single bare metal host. It
could involve a network boot server, a network traffic generator machine
for external network iperf testing, etc.

What is the minimal environment needed for bare metal hosts?

Stefan

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature