Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Evaluation of CPU Consuming, Memory Utilization and Time Transfering Between Virtual Machines in Network by using HTTP and FTP techniques

Evaluation of CPU Consuming, Memory Utilization and Time Transfering Between Virtual Machines in Network by using HTTP and FTP techniques

Ratings: (0)|Views: 488|Likes:
Published by ijcsis
In this paper we want to evaluate Transfer Time, Memory Utilization and CPU Consuming between virtual machines in Network by using FTP and HTTP benchmarks. As a virtualization platform for running the benchmarks we have used Xen hypervisor in para-virtualization mode. The virtual machine technology offers some benefits such as live migration, fault tolerance, security, resource management etc. The experiments performed show that virtual machines above the hypervisor consume more CPU, memory and have bigger transfer times than in a non virtualized environment.
In this paper we want to evaluate Transfer Time, Memory Utilization and CPU Consuming between virtual machines in Network by using FTP and HTTP benchmarks. As a virtualization platform for running the benchmarks we have used Xen hypervisor in para-virtualization mode. The virtual machine technology offers some benefits such as live migration, fault tolerance, security, resource management etc. The experiments performed show that virtual machines above the hypervisor consume more CPU, memory and have bigger transfer times than in a non virtualized environment.

More info:

Published by: ijcsis on Jul 07, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

04/21/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Evaluation of CPU Consuming, MemoryUtilization and Time Transfering Between VirtualMachines in Network by using HTTP and FTPtechniques.
Igli TAFA, Elinda KAJO, Elma ZANAJ, Ariana BEJLERI, Aleksandër XHUVANI
Polytechnic University of Tirana, Information Technology FacultyComputer Engineering DepartmentTiranë, Albania
itafaj@gmail.com
,
e_kajo@yahoo.com, ezanaj@gmail.com
,
arianabejleri@yahoo.com
,
axhuvani@yahoo.com
 
Abstract:
 
In this paper we want to evaluate TransferTime, Memory Utilization and CPU Consumingbetween virtual machines in Network by using FTP andHTTP benchmarks. As a virtualization platform forrunning the benchmarks we have used Xen hypervisorin para-virtualization mode. The virtual machinetechnology offers some benefits such as live migration,fault tolerance, security, resource management etc. Theexperiments performed show that virtual machinesabove the hypervisor consume more CPU, memory andhave bigger transfer times than in a non virtualizedenvironment.
 Keywords:
 
Transfer Time, Memory Utilization, CPU Consuming, Virtual Machines, Xen-Hypervisor.
 
I.
 
INTRODUCTIONVirtual machine technology offers a lot of benefits asshown in previous research[1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7],[8] such are live migration,fault tolerance, security, resource management andreduced energy consumption. Some virtual machinetechnologies are based on a software layer calledHypervisor [9]. There are [10] three main types of virtualization: full virtualization, OS virtualizationand para-virtualization. Para virtualization approachgives more flexibility than others. Based on thisapproach we can use ESX-Server [ 11] or Xen [] .Because Xen is free open source and implementsballooning method [12] we have used this Hypervisor.Anyway, the virtualization technology offers some“black holes”, for example the Hypervisor introducesa slight delay during a transfers from one machine toanother one [13]. Also CPU consumes morefunctionalities in machines which include theHypervisor than those machines without it. Anotherproblem is Physical Memory utilization and dataoverhead during live migration phase. Someresearchers in [13], [14] presented
 
some
 
methods of memory overbooking and compression of thismemory in virtual machine, in order to improvememory utilization and performance of migration.In this paper we analyze Transfer Time, CPUConsuming and Memory Utilization between Virtualmachines and physical machines by using FTP [15]and HTTP requests [13]. All results are presented inrespectively tables.This paper is organized as follows. Section II disscribes the experimental architecture. Section IIIpresents the experimental evaluation. Section IVpresents conclusions and outlines areas of futurework.II.
 
EXPERIMENTAL ARCHITECTUREThe Figure 1 and Figure 2 we present the basic of experimental architecture. In Figure 1 there are 2computers which are connected with UTP cat 7 cableusing Twisted Pair technique. Communication of twocomputers is Full duplex. Both computers cancommunicate with each other by network fast-ethernet interface 100/1000 Mbit/sec. In eachcomputer we have setup the virtual machineenvironment with Xen 4.1 and CentOS 5.5 as Dom0operating system.
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 9, No. 6, June 2011100http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
 
 
Fig.1 Communication between 2 Physical Machine with TwistedPair. Above those hosts are Guest Virtual Machines.
In figure 2 we have installed 3 computers connectedwith Gigabit switch. The topology of routing is Bus.Communication is Full Duplex. We used amanagement Gigabit Cisco Switch, but we could usesimple switch too.
Fig 2. Three Computers connected with a Gigabit Switch. AboveHost computers are setup Virtual Machines
The architecture of all the machines is X86 - 64 bit,RAM 4 GB. CPU Quad-Core, supported with VTand Hyper-threading technology.III.
 
EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION:The evaluation is separated in three phases:
 
Evaluation of transfer time for FTP and Webservers
 
Evaluation of CPU consumption for FTP andWeb servers
 
Evaluation of memory utilization for FTP andWeb serves
Evaluation of transfer time in FTP server
 
Evaluation of transfer time between 2 VM onthe same Host
 
Evaluation of transfer time between 2 VM ondifferent Hosts
 
Evaluation of transfer time between 2 physicalmachines connected by twisted pair cable.
 
Evaluation of transfer time between 3 PhysicalMachines connected by Gigabit SwitchInitially we have used 2 physical machines whichsupport 2 virtual machines, by using para-virtualization approach (XEN 4.1). In both machineswe have installed CentOS 5.5 as Dom0. In DomU1and DomU2 respectively we have installed ScientificLinux 6.0 and Ubuntu 10.04 Server for the firstmachine. In the second machine in DomU1 isinstalled Ubuntu 10.04 Server. Initially we want totest the transfer time from a client to a serverbetween 2 VM in the same physical host by usingFTP technique. We will repeat the test by using 2virtual machines in different physical hosts andfinally we will evaluate this time between 2 physicalmachines connected by twisted pair technique. Wewant to transfer ISO image (XP.ISO with SP2 = 557MB). In the machine with Scientific Linux 6.0 we runa FTP client and in Ubuntu 10.04 a FTP server. Torealize the transfer of XP.ISO file from one machineto another we have used Samba FTP tool (which ispart of Scientific or Ubuntu Server). We can measurethe time of file transfer from the start moment atsource machine to the destination machine.The experiment is repeated again with ScientificLinux 6.0 client machine as DomU1 in host 1 andUbuntu 10.04 Server as DomU1 in host 2 which isused as FTP server.Finally we will evaluate the time transferred between2 physical machines, respectively host 1 and host 2.Host 2 will serve as FTP server and Host 1 as a FTPclient. The results are presented in table 1:
TABLE1 THE EVALUATION OF TIME TRANSFERRED OFXP ISO IMAGE BY USING SAMBA FTP TOOLTime transferredbetween 2 VM onthe same Host(Host 1)Time transferredbetween 2 VM ondifferent HostsTime transferredbetween 2 PhysicalHosts48 sec 86 sec 36 sec
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 9, No. 6, June 2011101http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
 
In Figure 2 we have 3 computers connected with aGigabit Switch. All computers communicate witheach other by Fiber channel. This communicationwill increase the performance of network (As itknows communication with fiber channel utilizemore bandwidth and speed than UTP cable). Thethird computer is a clone of second computer. Nowwe want to evaluate the transfer time between 2 VMin different hosts (i.e between DomU1 in host 1 andDomU1 in host3). Then will transfer the image fromcomputer 1 to computer 3. The results are presentedin table 2
TABLE 2 THE EVALUATION OF TIME TRANSFERRED OFXP ISO IMAGE BY USING SAMBA FTPTime transferred between 2VM on different Hosts(DomU1 in Host 1 and DomU1 in Host3)Time transferred between 2Physical Hosts (Host 1 andHost 3)83 sec 32 sec
Let`s analyze Tab. 1 and Tab. 2.In Tab. 1 the time transferred between 2 VM on thesame host is small. This is because the transfer of 557MB image file from one VM to another oneperformed over the interfaces of the same computerarchitecture (In reality we are in the same computer).If we compare time transferred between 2 VM ondifferent host as it looks from table 1, total timetransferring is 86 sec. The reasons are:
 
The transferred speed of the file between 2computers over the network is more slowlythen the internal interface of computerarchitecture (ISA interface).
 
Media communication between hosts is basedon UTP cat 7 which is more slowly then othermedias (i.e fiber media, which is presented intable 2)Also in table 1 we show that time transferred betweendifferent hosts is 36 sec (< 86 sec and < 48 sec). Inthe both cases the main reason is the delay that isintroduced from the Hypervisor.In table 2, the time decrease slightly. The reason ismedia communication. In table 2 we are usingGigabit Switch and Fiber channel communicationwhile in table 1 we are using only UTP cable.
Evaluation of CPU consuming in FTP Server
We want to evaluate the CPU consuming of WebServer which means how much is the percentage of CPU dedicated to our experiment. It is presented inaverage values during the test in figure 1 and figure2. To monitor the CPU consuming we have to used
 xentop
command in /proc and System Monitor intoSystem Administrator Menu. Both of them offer anexplicit form of CPU consuming including all locatedprocesses into computer by calculating the averagevalue [ (DomU1+DomU2+…)/n where n is thenumber of virtual machines (The same thing wouldbe with physical machines) ] of these processes invirtual or physical machines in our experiment. Tocalculate the total CPU consuming we have built ascript in C which gives a formula:
 Running process rate x nr of active process +Sleeping process rate x nr of sleeping process= TotalCPU Consuming
(1)
TABLE.3 AVERAGE OF CPU CONSUMING DURING THETRANSFERRED OF 557 MB BASED ON FIGURE 1 ANDFORMULA 1CPU consumingbetween 2 VM onthe same Host(Host 1)CPU consumingbetween 2 VM ondifferent HostsCPU consumingbetween 2 PhysicalHosts61,4% 62,2 % 55.1 %TABLE. 4 AVERAGE OF CPU CONSUMING DURING THETRANSFERRED OF 557 MB BASED ON FIGURE 2 ANDFORMULA 1CPU consuming between 2VM on different Hosts(DomU1 in Host 1 and DomU1 in Host3)CPU consuming between 2Physical Hosts (Host 1 andHost 3)61,45% 55.16%
As it look from table 3 CPU consuming between 2VM is higher than between 2 physical machines. Thereason is a part of CPU, consumes to maintenancethe Hypervisor. (61,4 % > 55,1 %). CPU consumingdoesn’t affect from the computer communication innetwork. This is the reason that in table 4, CPUconsuming has the same values as table 3.
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 9, No. 6, June 2011102http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->