This document summarizes a study comparing the open source hypervisors Xen and KVM. It finds that Xen performs slightly better than KVM for CPU-intensive and kernel compile tests, while KVM performs better for I/O tests due to disk caching. For performance isolation, both hypervisors show good isolation of stressed VMs from normal VMs, except Xen has little isolation for network traffic while KVM has issues with disk and network receiver tests. Scalability tests show Xen scales well with additional VMs, while KVM performance degrades and VMs crash with more than 4 VMs.
Xenorgs open stack_related_initiativesTodd Deshane
Xen.org has several initiatives that aim to have an impact onOpenStack adoption and feature richness. This talk will include adiscussion on the Xen Cloud Platform (XCP), the XCP toolstack (XAPI)port to popular Linux distributions, and the Xen on ARM initiative.
XCP combines the Xen hypervisor with enhanced security, storage, andnetwork virtualization technologies to offer a rich set of virtualinfrastructure cloud services. These XCP cloud services can beleveraged by OpenStack cloud providers to enable isolation andmulti-tenancy capabilities in their environments. XCP also providesthe user requirements of security, availability, performance, andisolation for private and public OpenStack cloud deployments.
Xen.org is working to make XCP and OpenStack work seamlessly so thattogether they can be the ultimate open source cloud solution. Inaddition to deploying XCP as a separate component with OpenStack,Xen.org is simultaneously porting the XCP toolstack (XAPI) to Linuxdistributions, which will give cloud administrators an easy-to-installOpenStack and Xen-based integrated alternative.
Finally, industry thought leaders, such as Mark Shuttleworth, aresupporting the adoption of ARM in server-class systems. Consequently,the port of Xen to the ARM platform could make it possible forOpenStack and Xen to lead the way into the future of ARM-based clouddeployments.
http://cloudstack.org/about-cloudstack/cloudstack-events/viewevent/29-build-an-open-source-cloud-day-boston.html
XCP combines the Xen hypervisor with enhanced security, storage, and network virtualization technologies to offer a rich set of virtualinfrastructure cloud services. These XCP cloud services can be leveraged by cloud providers to enable isolation and multi-tenancy capabilities in their environments. XCP also provides the user requirements of security, availability, performance, and isolation for private and public cloud deployments.
Video presentation of these slides:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTwFPWcqvY8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RQUp1vPeiU
Cloud computing is catching on in a big way in industry, government, and academia. One of the main reasons for increased adoption is that most of the underlying cloud technologies are open source. This talk will give an overview of these key open source components. The focus will be on infrastructure as a service (IaaS) and in particular technologies such as Xen and OpenStack. Come and learn about these technologies and how you can get involved with these open source projects.
Xenorgs open stack_related_initiativesTodd Deshane
Xen.org has several initiatives that aim to have an impact onOpenStack adoption and feature richness. This talk will include adiscussion on the Xen Cloud Platform (XCP), the XCP toolstack (XAPI)port to popular Linux distributions, and the Xen on ARM initiative.
XCP combines the Xen hypervisor with enhanced security, storage, andnetwork virtualization technologies to offer a rich set of virtualinfrastructure cloud services. These XCP cloud services can beleveraged by OpenStack cloud providers to enable isolation andmulti-tenancy capabilities in their environments. XCP also providesthe user requirements of security, availability, performance, andisolation for private and public OpenStack cloud deployments.
Xen.org is working to make XCP and OpenStack work seamlessly so thattogether they can be the ultimate open source cloud solution. Inaddition to deploying XCP as a separate component with OpenStack,Xen.org is simultaneously porting the XCP toolstack (XAPI) to Linuxdistributions, which will give cloud administrators an easy-to-installOpenStack and Xen-based integrated alternative.
Finally, industry thought leaders, such as Mark Shuttleworth, aresupporting the adoption of ARM in server-class systems. Consequently,the port of Xen to the ARM platform could make it possible forOpenStack and Xen to lead the way into the future of ARM-based clouddeployments.
http://cloudstack.org/about-cloudstack/cloudstack-events/viewevent/29-build-an-open-source-cloud-day-boston.html
XCP combines the Xen hypervisor with enhanced security, storage, and network virtualization technologies to offer a rich set of virtualinfrastructure cloud services. These XCP cloud services can be leveraged by cloud providers to enable isolation and multi-tenancy capabilities in their environments. XCP also provides the user requirements of security, availability, performance, and isolation for private and public cloud deployments.
Video presentation of these slides:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTwFPWcqvY8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RQUp1vPeiU
Cloud computing is catching on in a big way in industry, government, and academia. One of the main reasons for increased adoption is that most of the underlying cloud technologies are open source. This talk will give an overview of these key open source components. The focus will be on infrastructure as a service (IaaS) and in particular technologies such as Xen and OpenStack. Come and learn about these technologies and how you can get involved with these open source projects.
Live Container Migration: OpenStack Summit Barcelona 2016Phil Estes
A talk presented by Phil Estes & Shaun Murakami, IBM Cloud Open Technologies, at the Barcelona OpenStack Summit on October 25, 2016. This talk covers a new feature that will be available in the Docker 1.13 engine for using the CRIU project to checkpoint and restore container processes on Linux. Phil & Shaun present details of this new capability and then demonstrate a proof-of-concept "live migration" of containers across nova compute hosts.
Introdution to Docker (theory and hands on) dbCafé - dbTrentoCristian Consonni
In this presentation I will introduce Docker, an "an open-source project that automates the deployment of applications inside software containers, by providing an additional layer of abstraction and automation of operating-system-level virtualization on Linux." (source: Wikipedia). The presentation has an initial theoretical part and a second more practical, hands on part.
Linux Containers(LXC) allow running multiple isolated Linux instances (containers) on the same host.
Containers share the same kernel with anything else that is running on it, but can be constrained to only use a defined amount of resources such as CPU, memory or I/O.
A container is a way to isolate a group of processes from the others on a running Linux system.
Nested Virtualization is becoming hot and required to support multiple emerging usage models like XenClient, McAFee Deep Safe, HyperV etc. After enabling nested VMX support for Xen, we have been working on improving its quality and performance to make it run well with these new usages. In the session, we would like update current status of nested virtualization support in Xen, and also demonstrate what we are doing along with new hardware-assisted nested virtulization in this area.
Christian Kniep from Docker Inc. gave this talk at the Stanford HPC Conference.
"This talk will recap the history of and what constitutes Linux Containers, before laying out how the technology is employed by various engines and what problems these engines have to solve. Afterward, Christian will elaborate on why the advent of standards for images and runtimes moved the discussion from building and distributing containers to orchestrating containerized applications at scale. In conclusion, attendees will get an update on what problems still hinder the adoption of containers for distributed high performance workloads and how Docker is addressing these issues."
Christian Kniep is a Technical Account Manager at Docker, Inc. With a 10 year journey rooted in the HPC parts of the german automotive industry, Christian Kniep started to support CAE applications and VR installations. When told at a conference that HPC can not learn anything from the emerging Cloud and BigData companies, he became curious and was leading the containerization effort of the cloud-stack at Playstation Now. Christian joined Docker Inc in 2017 to help push the adoption forward and be part of the innovation instead of an external bystander. During the day he helps Docker customers in the EMEA region to fully utilize the power of containers; at night he likes to explore new emerging trends by containerizing them first and seek application in the nebulous world of DevOps.
Watch the video: https://wp.me/p3RLHQ-i4X
Learn more: http://docker.com
and
http://hpcadvisorycouncil.com
Sign up for our insideHPC Newsletter: http://insidehpc.com
UPDATED OCTOBER 2015: Unikernels are small, fast, easily deployable, and very secure application stacks. Lacking a traditional operating system layer, they provide a new way of looking at the cloud which goes beyond the methodologies used by Docker and other container technologies.
This is an update of the deck as delivered by Russell Pavlicek. This includes some ground-breaking work done in the Rump Kernel project to bring web servers, database, and scripting language into the world of Unikernels.
Deck result of the Ohio Linuxfest 2015 in Columbus, OH.
KVM and docker LXC Benchmarking with OpenStackBoden Russell
Passive benchmarking with docker LXC and KVM using OpenStack hosted in SoftLayer. These results provide initial incite as to why LXC as a technology choice offers benefits over traditional VMs and seek to provide answers as to the typical initial LXC question -- "why would I consider Linux Containers over VMs" from a performance perspective.
Results here provide insight as to:
- Cloudy ops times (start, stop, reboot) using OpenStack.
- Guest micro benchmark performance (I/O, network, memory, CPU).
- Guest micro benchmark performance of MySQL; OLTP read, read / write complex and indexed insertion.
- Compute node resource consumption; VM / Container density factors.
- Lessons learned during benchmarking.
The tests here were performed using OpenStack Rally to drive the OpenStack cloudy tests and various other linux tools to test the guest performance on a "micro level". The nova docker virt driver was used in the Cloud scenario to realize VMs as docker LXC containers and compared to the nova virt driver for libvirt KVM.
Please read the disclaimers in the presentation as this is only intended to be the "chip of the ice burg".
DPACC Acceleration Progress and DemonstrationOPNFV
The session provides an update to on the DPACC project within the OPNFV with a brief discussion on APIs and implementation progress. This session will review the API definition progress and follow up with a demo highlighting a common application as the vNF running on top of the DPACC defined layers. The demo will highlight the use of both hardware and software acceleration utilizing the DPACC defined acceleration layers. The demonstrationIt will highlight the progress in optimizing performance and latency characteristics of a platform to realize the vision of NFV while meeting stringent requirements, particularly for certain workloads, required by carriers.
Live Container Migration: OpenStack Summit Barcelona 2016Phil Estes
A talk presented by Phil Estes & Shaun Murakami, IBM Cloud Open Technologies, at the Barcelona OpenStack Summit on October 25, 2016. This talk covers a new feature that will be available in the Docker 1.13 engine for using the CRIU project to checkpoint and restore container processes on Linux. Phil & Shaun present details of this new capability and then demonstrate a proof-of-concept "live migration" of containers across nova compute hosts.
Introdution to Docker (theory and hands on) dbCafé - dbTrentoCristian Consonni
In this presentation I will introduce Docker, an "an open-source project that automates the deployment of applications inside software containers, by providing an additional layer of abstraction and automation of operating-system-level virtualization on Linux." (source: Wikipedia). The presentation has an initial theoretical part and a second more practical, hands on part.
Linux Containers(LXC) allow running multiple isolated Linux instances (containers) on the same host.
Containers share the same kernel with anything else that is running on it, but can be constrained to only use a defined amount of resources such as CPU, memory or I/O.
A container is a way to isolate a group of processes from the others on a running Linux system.
Nested Virtualization is becoming hot and required to support multiple emerging usage models like XenClient, McAFee Deep Safe, HyperV etc. After enabling nested VMX support for Xen, we have been working on improving its quality and performance to make it run well with these new usages. In the session, we would like update current status of nested virtualization support in Xen, and also demonstrate what we are doing along with new hardware-assisted nested virtulization in this area.
Christian Kniep from Docker Inc. gave this talk at the Stanford HPC Conference.
"This talk will recap the history of and what constitutes Linux Containers, before laying out how the technology is employed by various engines and what problems these engines have to solve. Afterward, Christian will elaborate on why the advent of standards for images and runtimes moved the discussion from building and distributing containers to orchestrating containerized applications at scale. In conclusion, attendees will get an update on what problems still hinder the adoption of containers for distributed high performance workloads and how Docker is addressing these issues."
Christian Kniep is a Technical Account Manager at Docker, Inc. With a 10 year journey rooted in the HPC parts of the german automotive industry, Christian Kniep started to support CAE applications and VR installations. When told at a conference that HPC can not learn anything from the emerging Cloud and BigData companies, he became curious and was leading the containerization effort of the cloud-stack at Playstation Now. Christian joined Docker Inc in 2017 to help push the adoption forward and be part of the innovation instead of an external bystander. During the day he helps Docker customers in the EMEA region to fully utilize the power of containers; at night he likes to explore new emerging trends by containerizing them first and seek application in the nebulous world of DevOps.
Watch the video: https://wp.me/p3RLHQ-i4X
Learn more: http://docker.com
and
http://hpcadvisorycouncil.com
Sign up for our insideHPC Newsletter: http://insidehpc.com
UPDATED OCTOBER 2015: Unikernels are small, fast, easily deployable, and very secure application stacks. Lacking a traditional operating system layer, they provide a new way of looking at the cloud which goes beyond the methodologies used by Docker and other container technologies.
This is an update of the deck as delivered by Russell Pavlicek. This includes some ground-breaking work done in the Rump Kernel project to bring web servers, database, and scripting language into the world of Unikernels.
Deck result of the Ohio Linuxfest 2015 in Columbus, OH.
KVM and docker LXC Benchmarking with OpenStackBoden Russell
Passive benchmarking with docker LXC and KVM using OpenStack hosted in SoftLayer. These results provide initial incite as to why LXC as a technology choice offers benefits over traditional VMs and seek to provide answers as to the typical initial LXC question -- "why would I consider Linux Containers over VMs" from a performance perspective.
Results here provide insight as to:
- Cloudy ops times (start, stop, reboot) using OpenStack.
- Guest micro benchmark performance (I/O, network, memory, CPU).
- Guest micro benchmark performance of MySQL; OLTP read, read / write complex and indexed insertion.
- Compute node resource consumption; VM / Container density factors.
- Lessons learned during benchmarking.
The tests here were performed using OpenStack Rally to drive the OpenStack cloudy tests and various other linux tools to test the guest performance on a "micro level". The nova docker virt driver was used in the Cloud scenario to realize VMs as docker LXC containers and compared to the nova virt driver for libvirt KVM.
Please read the disclaimers in the presentation as this is only intended to be the "chip of the ice burg".
DPACC Acceleration Progress and DemonstrationOPNFV
The session provides an update to on the DPACC project within the OPNFV with a brief discussion on APIs and implementation progress. This session will review the API definition progress and follow up with a demo highlighting a common application as the vNF running on top of the DPACC defined layers. The demo will highlight the use of both hardware and software acceleration utilizing the DPACC defined acceleration layers. The demonstrationIt will highlight the progress in optimizing performance and latency characteristics of a platform to realize the vision of NFV while meeting stringent requirements, particularly for certain workloads, required by carriers.
Trusted Advisors in Retained Executive SearchCharles Moore
Before you engage an executive search firm, it’s important to understand whether they are up to the task at hand. At NextGen Global Executive Search, our team of recruiters have cross-functional experience in the industries listed below. Each search includes timelines where we earn the fees only if we meet those deliverables. We design a search strategy based on the performance objectives of the role and target specific people and competitors to ensure we are attracting the best in for your industry.
Our behavioral profiling, hypothetical and situational interview techniques, the fact that we meet finalist candidates face-to-face and videotape those interviews, and perform reference checks prior to submitting finalist candidates is why we offer a full one-year replacement guarantee.
Retained Executive Search with Cross Industry Expertise
The industries we serve in executive search are complimentary and cross-functional in placing Top Talent that achieves your talent acquisition needs in:
• Defense Systems: C5ISR, UAV, Weapons, Aerospace, Cyber Security, Airborne Power
• Digital Media: Connected Devices, Mobile Apps, Mobile Banking, Semantic Web
• Enterprise Systems: Data Center, EAM, SaaS, Cloud Computing, Enterprise Mobility
• Medical Devices: Surgical, Renal, Dialysis, Plasma, Neuro, Biomedical, Pharma
• Wireless Telecom: Infrastructure Systems, 4G & LTE Networks, DAS & RF Components
• Energy: Oil & Gas, Smart Meters, Smart Grids, Power Generation, Renewable Energy
La Nostra MISSION: coniugare inscindibilmente qualità-innovazione-benfici-costi .
Attenta alle continue evoluzioni delle tecniche d’isolamento per il risparmio energetico ed alle novità tecnologiche principalmente legate alle problematiche delle superfici vetrate, InCar Service offre ad un mercato sempre più esigente in termini di estetica e funzionalità, pellicole selezionate tra i migliori produttori mondiali: da quelle omologate per i vetri degli autoveicoli a quelle certificate di sicurezza, dalle tende innovative per interno realizzate in poliestere riflettente alle vernici selettive per superfici plastiche.
Grazie alla vasta gamma delle pellicola vetri INCAR è possibile aggiungere caratteristiche fisico-ottiche a qualsiasi vetro, trasformandolo in un vetro di diverse tipologie ad alte prestazioni.
I campi d'applicazione del prodotto "film vetri" sono molteplici come molteplici sono le finalità e le varietà atte a soddisfare le esigenze di ogni cliente.
Analytics & Reporting for Amazon Cloud LogsCloudlytics
A deep dive into the Cloudytics Reports section, with the Following reports in detail & how they can help you with your business use case:
- Geo Tracker Report
- IP Tracker Report
- Timeline Report
- ELB Tracker
- CloudFront Cost Analyzer
- Custom Function
Debunking Myths & Mysteries of Retained SearchCharles Moore
Before you engage an executive search firm, it’s important to understand whether they are up to the task at hand. At NextGen Global Executive Search, our team of recruiters have cross-functional experience in the industries listed below. Each search includes timelines where we earn the fees only if we meet those deliverables. We design a search strategy based on the performance objectives of the role and target specific people and competitors to ensure we are attracting the best in for your industry.
Our behavioral profiling, hypothetical and situational interview techniques, the fact that we meet finalist candidates face-to-face and videotape those interviews, and perform reference checks prior to submitting finalist candidates is why we offer a full one-year replacement guarantee.
Retained Executive Search with Cross Industry Expertise
• Digital Media: Connected Devices, Mobile Apps, Mobile Banking, Semantic Web
• Wireless Telecom: Infrastructure Systems, 4G & LTE Networks, DAS & RF Components
• Energy: Oil & Gas, Smart Meters, Smart Grids, Power Generation, Renewable Energy
OpenStack Magnum, Containers-as-a-Service for OpenStack clouds. This talk explains how Magnum fits among other OpenStack projects, and what abstracts are available in the Magnum API. Learn how Magnum is different from other Container management software.
What's Next in OpenStack? A Glimpse At The RoadmapShamailXD
YouTube Recording: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCdqOxD5G0M
Whether you are a newbie to OpenStack looking at building your first cloud or an experienced operator with years of OpenStack success behind you, you've probably spent some time wondering what to expect from the OpenStack project over the next several releases. Will it finally support that new capability you've been waiting for? Should you plan for an upgrade in the next 6 months? While the development community is always working and planning new features, its takes a lot of time on IRC to get a complete view across the different projects. The OpenStack Product WG spent time this cycle working with the project teams and PTLs to understand their priorities for the next several OpenStack releases. Where we have always had an understanding of what's to come in the next release, we're hoping to present a long-term view of the future landscape of OpenStack. In this session, we'll present our findings across the different projects in an effort to give users a glimpse into the OpenStack roadmap
We present initial results from and quantitative analysis of two leading open source hypervisors, Xen and KVM. This study focuses on the overall performance, performance isolation, and scalability of virtual machines running on these hypervisors. Our comparison was carried out using a benchmark suite that we developed to make the results easily repeatable. Our goals are to understand how the different architectural decisions taken by different hypervisor developers affect the resulting hypervisors, to help hypervisor developers realize areas of improvement for their hypervisors, and to help users make informed decisions
about their choice of hypervisor.
This is a workshop done on codemonsters.pro technological conference.
It illustrates how you can create and deal with vm and container virtual infrastructures and combine them in a useful way.
From SCALE13 session on 2015-02-22. Overview of Docker, swarm, and demonstration of docker-machine for easily bootstrapping container environments and swarm clusters.
KubeCon EU 2016: Leveraging ephemeral namespaces in a CI/CD pipelineKubeAcademy
One of the most underrated features of Kubernetes is namespaces. In the market, instead of using this feature, people are still stuck with having different clusters for their environments. This talk will try to break this approach, and will introduce how we end up using ephemeral namespaces within our CI/CD pipeline. It will cover the architecture of our system for running the user acceptance tests on isolated ephemeral namespaces with every bits and pieces running within pods. While doing this, we will set up our CI/CD pipeline on top of TravisCI, GoCD, and Selenium that is controlled by Nightwatch.js.
Sched Link: http://sched.co/6Bcb
Oscon 2012 : From Datacenter to the Cloud - Featuring Xen and XCPThe Linux Foundation
Do you dream of being able to spin up ten or twenty (or a thousand) virtual machines in an instant? Discover and repair resource bottlenecks without moving a finger? Dodge the loss of an entire storage array with no-one noticing? Span across data centers with a fleet of virtual machines? This is no sales pitch; during this tutorial, we’ll demonstrate how to leverage truly FOSS tools to build a powerful, scalable cloud that easily competes with those proprietary solutions!
This deep-dive into Xen, Xen Cloud Platform, and other FOSS cloud tools and concepts is intended both for those ready to wholeheartedly embrace virtualization and for those already seasoned in general virtualization practices. You’ll leave with a collection of pre-made tools that you can use right out of the box or modify to your liking. You’ll also leave with immediately useful knowledge on best practices and common pitfalls, presented by actual FOSS practitioners like you.
We begin this tutorial by discussing Xen, Xen Cloud Platform (XCP), and XCP cloud concepts (pools, hosts, storage, networks, etc.). We then explore in detail the API that makes Xen so useful for building a cloud, explore provisioning of hosts and guests using PXE, and discuss templating and installing guest virtual machines. Critical to understanding potential bottlenecks, identifying tuning opportunities and planning for the future, we will discuss performance monitoring and methodologies. Next, we teach you how to make the most of your new FOSS cloud capabilities and discuss in detail high availability infrastructure for storage and networking, advanced networking capabilities like bonding/VLANs, and the cloud orchestration tools that save you time and money. All of this with a focus on XCP in enterprise environments. Tools discussed include DRBD, Pacemaker, Open vSwitch, Cloudstack, Openstack, and more.
We conclude by shedding light on exciting developments: Xen 4.2 has recently been released, with just over a year of development time and nearly 3,000 changesets. We will discuss many of the new features introduced in 4.2, as well as what changes we have in store for the 4.3 release as well as other exciting developments.
A Survey of Performance Comparison between Virtual Machines and Containersprashant desai
Since the onset of Cloud computing and its inroads into infrastructure as a service, Virtualization has become peak
of importance in the field of abstraction and resource management. However, these additional layers of abstraction provided by virtualization come at a trade-off between performance and cost in a cloud environment where everything is on a pay-per-use basis. Containers which are perceived to be the future of virtualization are developed to address these issues. This study paper scrutinizes the performance of a conventional virtual machine and contrasts them with the containers. We cover the critical
assessment of each parameter and its behavior when its subjected to various stress tests. We discuss the implementations and their performance metrics to help us draw conclusions on which one is ideal to use for desired needs. After assessment of the result and discussion of the limitations, we conclude with prospects for future research
In his public lecture, Christian Timmerer provides insights into the fascinating history of video streaming, starting from its humble beginnings before YouTube to the groundbreaking technologies that now dominate platforms like Netflix and ORF ON. Timmerer also presents provocative contributions of his own that have significantly influenced the industry. He concludes by looking at future challenges and invites the audience to join in a discussion.
zkStudyClub - Reef: Fast Succinct Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge Regex ProofsAlex Pruden
This paper presents Reef, a system for generating publicly verifiable succinct non-interactive zero-knowledge proofs that a committed document matches or does not match a regular expression. We describe applications such as proving the strength of passwords, the provenance of email despite redactions, the validity of oblivious DNS queries, and the existence of mutations in DNA. Reef supports the Perl Compatible Regular Expression syntax, including wildcards, alternation, ranges, capture groups, Kleene star, negations, and lookarounds. Reef introduces a new type of automata, Skipping Alternating Finite Automata (SAFA), that skips irrelevant parts of a document when producing proofs without undermining soundness, and instantiates SAFA with a lookup argument. Our experimental evaluation confirms that Reef can generate proofs for documents with 32M characters; the proofs are small and cheap to verify (under a second).
Paper: https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/1886
Communications Mining Series - Zero to Hero - Session 1DianaGray10
This session provides introduction to UiPath Communication Mining, importance and platform overview. You will acquire a good understand of the phases in Communication Mining as we go over the platform with you. Topics covered:
• Communication Mining Overview
• Why is it important?
• How can it help today’s business and the benefits
• Phases in Communication Mining
• Demo on Platform overview
• Q/A
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesLaura Byrne
Clients don’t know what they don’t know. What web solutions are right for them? How does WordPress come into the picture? How do you make sure you understand scope and timeline? What do you do if sometime changes?
All these questions and more will be explored as we talk about matching clients’ needs with what your agency offers without pulling teeth or pulling your hair out. Practical tips, and strategies for successful relationship building that leads to closing the deal.
How to Get CNIC Information System with Paksim Ga.pptxdanishmna97
Pakdata Cf is a groundbreaking system designed to streamline and facilitate access to CNIC information. This innovative platform leverages advanced technology to provide users with efficient and secure access to their CNIC details.
Dr. Sean Tan, Head of Data Science, Changi Airport Group
Discover how Changi Airport Group (CAG) leverages graph technologies and generative AI to revolutionize their search capabilities. This session delves into the unique search needs of CAG’s diverse passengers and customers, showcasing how graph data structures enhance the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated search results, mitigating the risk of “hallucinations” and improving the overall customer journey.
GridMate - End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid...ThomasParaiso2
End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid regressions. In this session, we share our journey building an E2E testing pipeline for GridMate components (LWC and Aura) using Cypress, JSForce, FakerJS…
Threats to mobile devices are more prevalent and increasing in scope and complexity. Users of mobile devices desire to take full advantage of the features
available on those devices, but many of the features provide convenience and capability but sacrifice security. This best practices guide outlines steps the users can take to better protect personal devices and information.
Observability Concepts EVERY Developer Should Know -- DeveloperWeek Europe.pdfPaige Cruz
Monitoring and observability aren’t traditionally found in software curriculums and many of us cobble this knowledge together from whatever vendor or ecosystem we were first introduced to and whatever is a part of your current company’s observability stack.
While the dev and ops silo continues to crumble….many organizations still relegate monitoring & observability as the purview of ops, infra and SRE teams. This is a mistake - achieving a highly observable system requires collaboration up and down the stack.
I, a former op, would like to extend an invitation to all application developers to join the observability party will share these foundational concepts to build on:
A tale of scale & speed: How the US Navy is enabling software delivery from l...sonjaschweigert1
Rapid and secure feature delivery is a goal across every application team and every branch of the DoD. The Navy’s DevSecOps platform, Party Barge, has achieved:
- Reduction in onboarding time from 5 weeks to 1 day
- Improved developer experience and productivity through actionable findings and reduction of false positives
- Maintenance of superior security standards and inherent policy enforcement with Authorization to Operate (ATO)
Development teams can ship efficiently and ensure applications are cyber ready for Navy Authorizing Officials (AOs). In this webinar, Sigma Defense and Anchore will give attendees a look behind the scenes and demo secure pipeline automation and security artifacts that speed up application ATO and time to production.
We will cover:
- How to remove silos in DevSecOps
- How to build efficient development pipeline roles and component templates
- How to deliver security artifacts that matter for ATO’s (SBOMs, vulnerability reports, and policy evidence)
- How to streamline operations with automated policy checks on container images
GraphSummit Singapore | The Art of the Possible with Graph - Q2 2024Neo4j
Neha Bajwa, Vice President of Product Marketing, Neo4j
Join us as we explore breakthrough innovations enabled by interconnected data and AI. Discover firsthand how organizations use relationships in data to uncover contextual insights and solve our most pressing challenges – from optimizing supply chains, detecting fraud, and improving customer experiences to accelerating drug discoveries.
Goodbye Windows 11: Make Way for Nitrux Linux 3.5.0!SOFTTECHHUB
As the digital landscape continually evolves, operating systems play a critical role in shaping user experiences and productivity. The launch of Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 marks a significant milestone, offering a robust alternative to traditional systems such as Windows 11. This article delves into the essence of Nitrux Linux 3.5.0, exploring its unique features, advantages, and how it stands as a compelling choice for both casual users and tech enthusiasts.
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 daysAdtran
At WSTS 2024, Alon Stern explored the topic of parametric holdover and explained how recent research findings can be implemented in real-world PNT networks to achieve 100 nanoseconds of accuracy for up to 100 days.
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectKari Kakkonen
My and Rik Marselis slides at 30.5.2024 DASA Connect conference. We discuss about what is testing, then what is agile testing and finally what is Testing in DevOps. Finally we had lovely workshop with the participants trying to find out different ways to think about quality and testing in different parts of the DevOps infinity loop.
FIDO Alliance Osaka Seminar: The WebAuthn API and Discoverable Credentials.pdf
Xen versus kvm_20080623
1. Quantitative Comparison of Xen and KVM
Todd Deshane, Muli Ben-Yehuda Amit Shah Balaji Rao
Zachary Shepherd, IBM Haifa Research Lab Qumranet National Institute of
Jeanna N. Matthews Haifa University Campus B-15, Ambience Empyrean Technology Karnataka
Mount Carmel, Haifa 31905 64/14 Empress County Surathkal 575014 India
Computer Science
Israel Behind Empress Gardens
Clarkson University
Pune 411001 India
balajirrao@gmail.com
Potsdam, NY 13699 USA muli@il.ibm.com
{deshantm, shephezj, amit.shah@
jnm}@clarkson.edu qumranet.com
ABSTRACT For our initial set of tests, the experimental setup consisted of
We present initial results from and quantitative analysis of two Ubuntu Linux 8.04 AMD64 on the base machine. The Linux
leading open source hypervisors, Xen and KVM. This study kernel 2.6.24-18, Xen 3.2.1+2.6.24-18-xen, and KVM 62 were
focuses on the overall performance, performance isolation, and all installed from Ubuntu packages. All guests were
scalability of virtual machines running on these hypervisors. Our automatically created by a benchvm script that called debootstrap
comparison was carried out using a benchmark suite that we and installed Ubuntu 8.04 AMD64. The guests were then started
developed to make the results easily repeatable. Our goals are to with another benchvm script that passed the appropriate kernel
understand how the different architectural decisions taken by (2.6.24-18-xen for Xen and 2.6.24-18 for KVM). The hardware
different hypervisor developers affect the resulting hypervisors, system was a Dell OptiPlex 745 with a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2
to help hypervisor developers realize areas of improvement for CPU 6600, 4 GB of RAM, 250 GB hard drive, and two 1 Gigabit
their hypervisors, and to help users make informed decisions Ethernet cards. Test results from more software versions and
about their choice of hypervisor. hardware configurations are reported on our Benchvm Results
website [9].
1. INTRODUCTION Our benchmark testing focuses on three pillars of virtualization
IT professionals, developers, and other users of virtualization on benchmarking: overall performance, performance isolation, and
Linux often look for quantitative results to compare their scalability. We discuss the testing process and present our
hypervisor options. In this study, we compare two open source quantitative results from the tests in each of these categories. Due
hypervisors: the established Xen hypervisor and the more recent to space limitations, we then briefly mention related work and list
Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM) driver. it as further reading at the end of this paper.
Since its public release in 2003, Xen has been the subject of
many performance comparisons [3, 4, 6, 14, 15, 28, 29, 30, 35, 2. OVERALL PERFORMANCE
46, 48, 49]. Xen is well-known for its near-native performance To measure overall system performance, we ran a CPU-intensive
and its use of paravirtualization. KVM, a relative new-comer to test, a kernel compile, an IOzone [22] write test, and an IOzone
the virtualization market with its debut in early 2007, relies on read test. We compared the Xen and KVM numbers against the
CPU support for virtualization and leverages existing Linux non-virtualized (native) Linux baseline, shown in Table 1.
kernel infrastructure to provide an integrated hypervisor For the CPU-intensive test, Xen was very close to Linux and
approach (as opposed to Xen's stand-alone hypervisor approach). KVM had slightly more degradation than Xen. For the kernel
KVM is known for its rapid inclusion into the mainline Linux compile, the degradation for Xen was about half that of Linux
kernel. As KVM matures, more performance testing and (likely due to less memory). KVM again had slightly more
comparisons are being done with it, like those at IBM [21]. degradation than Xen. On the other hand, KVM had higher write
With the wide variety of virtualization options available, several and read performance than Xen according to our results. We
efforts to provide benchmarks specifically designed for believe that KVM may have performed better than Xen in terms
comparing different virtualization systems have been initiated [8, of I/O due to disk caching.
12, 27, 40, 42]. For this study, we developed an open source The Phoronix Test Suite [37] was useful for running and
virtualization benchmark suite named benchvm [8] to help publishing the kernel compile and IOzone tests. Additional
automate testing, including setting up the guests and running performance results including running the Phoronix Test Suite's
some of the tests. Our goal in using and developing benchvm has Universe Command Line Interface (CLI) tests with the command
been to provide repeatability and transparency so that others can line parameter universe-cli, and testing on other platforms
easily validate the results. The benchvm suite is still under heavy and with other benchmarks including Bonnie++ [11], Iperf [23],
development and, although still useful, should not yet be and Netperf [34], are reported on the Benchvm Results website
considered production-ready. [9].
Xen Summit, June 23-24, 2008, Boston, MA, USA.
2. Table 1. Overall performance of base Linux, Xen, and KVM For Xen, in Figure 1, as we increased the number of guests, the
time to compile Apache increased at a linear rate compared to the
number of guests. This shows that Xen had excellent scalability
and that Xen was able to share resources among guests well.
For KVM, in Figure 2, as we increased the number of guests to 4,
1 of the four guests crashed. As the guests were increased to 8, 4
guests crashed. With 16 guests, 7 guests crashed. With 30 guests,
3. PERFORMANCE ISOLATION the system crashed during the compile. This indicates that KVM
Performance isolation is a measure of how well guests are was not able to maintain performance as the number of guests
protected from extreme resource consumption in other guests. increased.
We used the testing methodology and isolation benchmark suite
that some of the authors of this paper developed previously [28].
For the isolation tests in this study, we ran SPECweb2005 [43]
on four virtual machine clients. The guest that runs a stress test is
referred to as the Stressed VM, since it is under a significant load
specific to the type of resource being tested. We measured the
percent of degradation in good response rate for the SPECweb
clients running the support workload with the stress test versus
the baseline without the stress test.
In Table 2, we show the results of the performance isolation tests
for Xen and KVM. Degradation of the Stressed VM is expected.
Isolation problems are indicated by degradation in the
performance of the Normal VM. Low degradation percentages
are better and DNR is the worst possible percent degradation.
DNR means that the guest “did not return” results and usually
indicates a kernel panic or network problem for the guest. Figure 1. Scalability of building Apache on Xen guests
Higher compile times are bad and more simultaneous guests are better.
Xen shows good isolation properties for the memory, fork, CPU,
and disk stress tests as seen in the Normal VM column. Xen
shows very little isolation for the network sender and no isolation
for the network receiver. Xen shows unexpectedly good
performance for the disk test and unexpectedly poor performance
for the network sender test.
KVM shows good isolation properties for all of the stress tests
and unexpectedly good performance for the network sender.
However, KVM shows unexpectedly poor performance for the
disk test and the network receiver test.
Table 2. Performance isolation of Xen versus KVM
Higher degradation percentages are bad and DNR is the worst possible.
Figure 2. Scalability of building Apache on KVM guests
Higher compile times are bad and more simultaneous guests are better.
A compile time of 0 seconds indicates that the guest crashed (did not report results).
5. RELATED WORK
There are countless performance studies on virtualization,
4. SCALABILITY including [2, 4, 6, 10, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30,
A virtualization system's level of scalability is determined by its 31, 33, 35, 36, 39, 41, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49]. In addition to our
ability to run more virtual machines without loss of performance. benchvm test suite [8], other virtualization benchmark suites
To measure scalability in this study, we first compiled Apache include vConsolidate [3, 12], VMmark [27], and Virtbench [40].
source code on one guest and then we increased the number of There are a number of general test suites, test harnesses, and
guests that were each doing an Apache compile. In the following related tools such as the Autotest Framework [5], BCFG2 [7],
graphs, lower compile times (except 0) and more simultaneous CFengine [13], DejaGnu [16], Expect [18], Kvm-test [24],
guests indicate better scalability. Gaps in the graph (compile Phoronix Test Suite [37], Puppet [38], Tcltest [45], and Xm-test
times of 0 seconds) indicate that the guests crashed and therefore [50]. General performance studies are in [1, 32].
were unable to report results.
Xen Summit, June 23-24, 2008, Boston, MA, USA.
3. 6. CONCLUSION [21] R. Harper and K. Rister, KVM Limits: Arbitrary or Architectural?, Presentation, KVM
Forum, http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/KvmForum2008?
We have presented a quantitative comparison of Xen and KVM action=AttachFile&do=get&target=kdf2008_6.pdf, 2008.
focusing on overall performance, performance isolation, and [22] IOzone Filesystem Benchmark, http://www.iozone.org/.
scalability. The most striking difference between the two systems
[23] Iperf, http://iperf.sourceforge.net/.
was in scalability. KVM had substantial problems with guests
crashing, beginning with 4 guests. KVM had better performance [24] Kvm-test, http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/KVMTest.
isolation than Xen, but Xen's isolation properties were also quite [25] J. LeVasseur, V. Uhlig, M. Chapman, P. Chubb, B. Leslie, and G. Heiser, Pre-
good. The overall performance results were mixed, with Xen out- virtualization: Soft Layering for Virtual Machines, Technical Report, Fakultat fur
Informatik, Universitat Karlsruhe (TH), 2006.
performing KVM on a kernel compile test and KVM out-
performing Xen on I/O-intensive tests. We would like to extend [26] J. Liu, W. Huang, B. Abali, and D.K. Panda, High Performance VMM-Bypass I/O in
Virtual Machines, USENIX Annual Technical Conference, 2006.
our comparison to include Xen with full virtualization (HVM)
and KVM with paravirtualized I/O. [27] V. Makhija, B. Herndon, P. Smith, L. Roderick, E. Zamost, and J. Anderson, VMmark: A
Scalable Benchmark for Virtualized Systems, Technical Report, VMware, 2006.
[28] J.N. Matthews, W. Hu, M. Hapuarachchi, T. Deshane, D. Dimatos, G. Hamilton, M.
7. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS McCabe, and J. Owens, Quantifying the Performance Isolation Properties of Virtualization
Systems, ACM Workshop on Experimental Computer Science (ExpCS),
We acknowledge Wenjin Hu and Madhujith Hapuarachchi for http://www.clarkson.edu/class/cs644/isolation/, 2007.
their Master's thesis work on performance isolation and [29] A. Menon, A.L. Cox, and W. Zwaenepoel, Optimizing Network Virtualization in Xen,
scalability benchmarking. We would also like to thank Cyrus USENIX Annual Technical Conference, 2006.
Katrak and Martin McDermott for early development and testing [30] A. Menon, J.R. Santos, Y. Turner, G.J. Janakiraman, and W. Zwaenepoel, Diagnosing
of benchvm. Lastly, we very much appreciate the feedback and Performance Overheads in the Xen Virtual Machine Environment, ACM/USENIX
International Conference on Virtual Execution Environments (VEE), 2005.
support of the Xen and KVM communities.
[31] Microsoft, Comparing Web Service Performance: WS Test 1.5 Benchmark Results for .NET
3.5/Windows Server 2008 vs. IBM WebSphere 6.1/Red Hat Linux Advanced Platform 5,
8. REFERENCES http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/cc302396.aspx, 2008.
[1] K. Adams and O. Agesen, A Comparison of Software and Hardware Techniques for x86
[32] J.C. Mogul, Brittle Metrics in Operating Systems Research, IEEE Workshop on Hot Topics
in Operating Systems (HotOS), 1999.
Virtualization, International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming
Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS), 2006. [33] K.T. Moller, Virtual Machine Benchmarking, Diploma Thesis, Universitat Karlsruhe (TH),
[2] P. Apparao, R. Iyer, and D. Newell, Towards Modeling & Analysis of Consolidated CMP 2007.
Servers, Workshop on the Design, Analysis, and Simulation of Chip Multi-Processors
(dasCMP), 2007.
[34] Netperf, http://www.netperf.org/netperf/.
[3] P. Apparao, R. Iyer, X. Zhang, D. Newell, and T. Adelmeyer, Characterization & Analysis
[35] D. Ongaro, A.L. Cox, and S. Rixner, Scheduling I/O in Virtual Machine Monitors,
ACM/USENIX International Conference on Virtual Execution Environments (VEE), 2008.
of a Server Consolidation Benchmark, ACM/USENIX International Conference on Virtual
Execution Environments (VEE), 2008. [36] P. Padala, K.G. Shin, X. Zhu, M. Uysal, Z. Wang, S. Singhal, A. Merchant, and K. Salem,
[4] P. Apparao, S. Makineni, and D. Newell, Characterization of Network Processing Adaptive Control of Virtualized Resources in Utility Computing Environments, ACM
European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys), 2007.
Overheads in Xen, IEEE International Workshop on Virtualization Technology in
Distributed Computing (VTDC), 2006. [37] Phoronix Test Suite, http://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/.
[5] Autotest Framework, http://test.kernel.org/autotest.
[38] Puppet, http://www.reductivelabs.com/projects/puppet/.
[6] P. Barham, B. Dragovic, K. Fraser, S. Hand, T. Harris, A. Ho, R. Neugebauer, I. Pratt, and
[39] B. Quetier, V. Neri, and F. Cappello, Selecting A Virtualization System For Grid/P2P Large
A. Warfield, Xen and the Art of Virtualization, ACM Symposium on Operating Systems
Scale Emulation, Workshop on Experimental Grid Testbeds for the Assessment of Large-
Principles (SOSP), 2003.
Scale Distributed Applications and Tools (EXPGRID), 2006.
[7] BCFG2, http://www.bcfg2.org/.
[40] R. Russell, Virtbench, http://www.ozlabs.org/~rusty/virtbench/.
[8] Benchvm, http://code.google.com/p/benchvm/.
[41] S. Soltesz, H. Potzl, M.E. Fiuczynski, A. Bavier, and L. Peterson, Container-based
[9] Benchvm Results, http://www.clarkson.edu/projects/virtualization/benchvm/. Operating System Virtualization: A Scalable, High-performance Alternative to Hypervisors,
ACM European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys), 2007.
[10] H.K.F. Bjerke, R.J. Andresen, and J. Amundsen, Virtualization in Clusters, Course Project,
[42] SPEC to Develop Standard Methods of Comparing Virtualization Performance, Press
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU),
Release, http://www.spec.org/specvirtualization/pressrelease.html, 2006.
http://haavard.dyndns.org/virtualization/clust_virt.pdf, 2004.
[11] Bonnie++, http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/.
[43] SPECweb2005, http://www.spec.org/web2005/.
[12] J.P. Casazza, M. Greenfield, and K. Shi, Redefining Server Performance Characterization
[44] Sun Microsystems, Web Services Performance Comparing Java 2 Enterprise Edition (J2EE
platform) and .NET Framework,
for Virtualization Benchmarking, Intel Technology Journal, 2006.
http://java.sun.com/performance/reference/whitepapers/WS_Test-1_0.pdf, 2004.
[13] CFengine, http://www.cfengine.org/.
[45] Tcltest, http://www.tcl.tk/man/tcl/TclCmd/tcltest.htm.
[14] L. Cherkasova and R. Gardner, Measuring CPU Overhead for I/O Processing in the Xen
[46] A. Theurer, K. Rister, O. Krieger, R. Harper, and S. Dobbelstein, Virtual Scalability:
Virtual Machine Monitor, USENIX Annual Technical Conference, 2005.
Charting the Performance of Linux in a Virtual World, Ottawa Linux Symposium, Volume
[15] B. Clark, T. Deshane, E. Dow, S. Evanchik, M. Finlayson, J. Herne, and J.N. Matthews, 2, http://www.linuxsymposium.org/2006/proceedings.php, 2006.
Xen and the Art of Repeated Research, USENIX Annual Technical Conference, 2004. [47] A. Venkatraman, V. Pandey, B. Plale, and S.S. Shei, Benchmarking Effort of Virtual
[16] DejaGnu, http://www.gnu.org/software/dejagnu/. Machines on Multicore Machines, Technical Report, Indiana University,
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/Research/techreports/, 2007.
[17] U. Drepper, The Cost of Virtualization, ACM Queue Magazine, 2008.
[48] VMware, A Performance Comparison of Hypervisors,
[18] Expect, http://expect.nist.gov/. http://www.vmware.com/pdf/hypervisor_performance.pdf, 2007.
[19] S.S. Foley, V. Pandey, M. Tang, F. Terkhorn, and A. Venkatraman, Benchmarking Servers
[49] XenSource, A Performance Comparison of Commercial Hypervisors,
http://www.xensource.com/Documents/hypervisor_performance_comparison_1_0_5_with_
using Virtual Machines, Indiana University, http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~mhtang/paper.pdf,
esx-data.pdf, 2007.
2007.
[20] D. Gupta, R. Gardner, and L. Cherkasova, XenMon: QoS Monitoring and Performance
[50] Xm-test, http://www.xen.org/files/summit_3/xs0906-xmtest.pdf.
Profiling Tool, Technical Report, Internet Systems and Storage Laboratory at HP
Laboratories, 2005.
Xen Summit, June 23-24, 2008, Boston, MA, USA.