5 ms·
I am curious why Facebook don't use? If they do use virtualization, the fact, 0 request lead to low power does not correct any more, for example linux containe
by reeze_xia 12y ago
I am curious why Facebook don't use?
If they do use virtualization, the fact, 0 request lead to low power does not correct any more, for example linux container, other container may accept requests, if so they have to dispatch request cross all containers and servers.
- otterley 12y agoThe Achilles heel of virtualization is networking. All of the hypervisors out there (VMWare, Xen, KVM) have user-space software switch implementations that dramatically reduce the throughput of TCP session creation. As a consequence you lose a significant amount of hardware potential to serve HTTP connections.
- reeze_xia 12y agoHow about lightweight virtualization like linux container, docker?
- otterley 12y agoThat's not virtualization; it's namespace isolation. There's a small performance impact if you're using NAT, but otherwise the kernel networking stack is used, so there's no performance penalty.
- reeze_xia 12y agoYes, indeed. I mean the optimization of energy saving seems not suitable for the condition of namespace isolation, since you can't control the other containers requests. if we have to, we need to dispatch request from server perspective but not container.
- vicaya 12y agoThis is wrong as well. VMware standard and distributed virtual switch is in hypervisor kernel.
- otterley 12y agoHow's VMWare's TCP new-session-switching-rate compared to Xen's OVS? Any benchmarks showing a significant improvement?
- wmf 12y agoWe just did some benchmarks on this topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8146536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8146536