On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 09:25 -0500, Tony Zakula wrote:
> I am not complaining about OpenVZ. I deploy servers on a regular
> basis using OpenVZ. I also deploy using KVM, and others. There is a
> massive difference between OpenVZ and KVM in implementation, system
> stability, etc. They are entirely different animals. You cannot
> discount the hypervisor. The hypervisor can make or break your
> application depending on how you're application is structured. For
> instance, Java apps run great on KVM hypervisors, but really poor if
> at all on OpenVZ unless you tune the OpenVZ instance to meet your Java
> apps needs. The reason for that is the way Java handles memory.
> Threads is another big issue hypervisors. To say that the hypervisor
> has no effect on application performance is not accurate at all.

So are you suggesting no benchmark is ever valid unless it is run on
every hypervisor available as well as on the bare metal? Clearly every
benchmark has defined parameters, and in this case OpenVZ was one of
those parameters.

So long as the benchmark is defined as "Nginx vs Cherokee under OpenVZ"
then it's a perfectly valid benchmark.

Cliff


_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx