XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Epyc VM to VM networking slow

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Compute
    206 Posts 23 Posters 101.4k Views 26 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • S Offline
      Seneram @JamesG
      last edited by

      @JamesG sure but none of those do concrete troubleshooting and digging to establish where it is and it also only seems like isolated issues and not something broad (while it is but people didnt look at it as such).

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • M Online
        manilx @olivierlambert
        last edited by

        @olivierlambert I believe that this is costly, nevertheless it needs to be fixed, as this CPU will get more mainstream as time goes by and as such it's not only cost but a good investment. I'm sure you'll get to the bottom of this now that you're tackling it.

        Looking forward to Ampere!

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • olivierlambertO Offline
          olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
          last edited by

          If I wouldn't be convinced to fix it, I wouldn't throw money & time to solve the problem 😉

          ForzaF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • florentF Offline
            florent Vates 🪐 XO Team @manilx
            last edited by

            @manilx said in Epyc VM to VM networking slow:

            @florent Hi,
            Both storages are NFS, all connections 10G.
            On both cases XO/XOA is running on the master.

            thank you for the test. At least it removed the easy fixes

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • ForzaF Online
              Forza @olivierlambert
              last edited by

              @olivierlambert said in Epyc VM to VM networking slow:

              If I wouldn't be convinced to fix it, I wouldn't throw money & time to solve the problem 😉

              I think everyone knows this. Nevertheless, it is frustrating anyone if it becomes a bottleneck.

              I am curious, do we know if this happens on Xen systems, or if it happens on xcp-ng systems where Open vSwitch is not used?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • olivierlambertO Offline
                olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                last edited by olivierlambert

                It happens on all Xen version we tested, the issue is clearly inside the Xen Hypervisor, and related on how the netif calls are triggering something slow inside AMD EPYC CPUs (not even Ryzen ones)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • florentF Offline
                  florent Vates 🪐 XO Team
                  last edited by

                  @manilx do you use NBD for delta backups ?
                  in the advanced settings

                  M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • M Online
                    manilx @florent
                    last edited by

                    @florent Florent, yes I do use NBD for all backups. And checking the backup log of the completed jobs I see that NBD is being used.

                    florentF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • florentF Offline
                      florent Vates 🪐 XO Team @manilx
                      last edited by

                      @manilx said in Epyc VM to VM networking slow:

                      @florent Florent, yes I do use NBD for all backups. And checking the backup log of the completed jobs I see that NBD is being used.

                      could you test disabling NBD ?

                      M 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • M Online
                        manilx @florent
                        last edited by

                        This post is deleted!
                        M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • M Online
                          manilx @manilx
                          last edited by

                          @manilx Running a test backup, one with NBD and then again without. Will report asap.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • M Online
                            manilx @florent
                            last edited by

                            @florent Result of backup tests:

                            ScreenShot 2024-04-11 at 10.03.48.png
                            ScreenShot 2024-04-11 at 10.10.42.png

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • planedropP Offline
                              planedrop Top contributor
                              last edited by

                              It may not be of any help, but wanted to add a little bit of info this anyway.

                              I'm seeing the same results on a set of Ubuntu 22.04 in my Threadripper based cluster. I didn't expect to see different results, since Threadripper is really just EPYC with some stuff turned off.

                              Specifically tested on a 16 core 1950X host and a 32 core 3970X host, both with 8 vCPUs on each VM, they topped out at 8 gigabit like most others are seeing.

                              Figured I'd add it in here.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • olivierlambertO Offline
                                olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                                last edited by

                                Thanks! We didn't test on threadrippers yet, so it's useful info 🙂

                                A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                • G Offline
                                  G-Ork
                                  last edited by

                                  This post is deleted!
                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                  • A Offline
                                    alex821982 @olivierlambert
                                    last edited by alex821982

                                    Is there any hope for a solution to this issue? How much do I understand this affects all generations?

                                    G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • bleaderB Offline
                                      bleader Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                                      last edited by bleader

                                      We're still actively working on it, we're still not a 100% sure what the root cause is unfortunately.

                                      It does seem to affect all Zen generations, from what we could gather, sligthly differently: it seems to be a bit better on zen3 and 4, but still always leading to underwhelming network performance for such machines.


                                      To provide some status/context to you guys: I worked on this internally for a while, then as I had to attend other tasks we hired external help, which gave us some insight but no solution, and now we have @andSmv working on it (but not this week as he's at the Xen Summit).

                                      From the contractors we had, we found that grant table and event channels have more occurences than on an intel xeon, looking like we're having more packet processed at first, but then they took way more time.

                                      What Andrei found most recently is that PV & PVH (which we do not support officially), are getting about twice the performance of HVM and PVHVM. Also, having both dom0 and a guest pinned to a single physical core is also having better results. It seems to indicate it may come from the handling of cache coherency and could be related to guest memory settings that differs between intel and amd. That's what is under investigation right now, but we're unsure there will be any possibilty to change that.


                                      I hope this helps make things a bit clearer to you guys, and shows we do invest a lot of time and money digging into this.

                                      S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                      • S Offline
                                        Seneram @bleader
                                        last edited by

                                        @bleader said in Epyc VM to VM networking slow:

                                        We're still actively working on it, we're still not a 100% sure what the root cause is unfortunately.

                                        I can also vouch for that they are taking it seriously and working on it. I have an ticket with them since the start of this essentially and work is definitely being done in said ticket to solve this once and for all.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • A Offline
                                          alex821982
                                          last edited by alex821982

                                          Do I understand correctly that the problem also occurs when exchanging a server with a shared NFS storage, where the VHDs are located, and not just between the VMs themselves? That is, the exchange of a virtual machine with disks attached to it on shared storage will be slowed down?

                                          S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • S Offline
                                            Seneram @alex821982
                                            last edited by

                                            @alex821982 no, we have seen no such indication... With that said we have not tested for that either and it is "possible" the main issue at hand is that all epycs processors hit an upper limit with network traffic going in and out of a VM. And it is a per physical host limit so if you have both VMs on same machine the limit is halved.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post