Poor performance on Juju local with lxc containers.

[Sebastian]

Thanks!! now we are really using the charm in the notebooks of the devs \o/

David, the Drupal charm was installing the xdebug as default, and in the
host was only the php-cli and php-apc so thats why.

Abs,
Sebas.



2014-07-09 5:28 GMT-03:00 David Cheney <david.cheney at canonical.com>:

> Excellent news. I'm glad you got to the bottom of it.
>
> Do you know why php5-xdebug was installed the lxc container, but not
> your vagrant vm ?
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Sebastian <sebas5384 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > ha!! gotcha!! finally I know why, the php5-xdebug was installed and
> enabled
> > by default, didn't know was such a big impact of performance.
> >
> > So this is going to the charm's configuration, so can be an option.
> >
> > Happy Sebas now.
> >
> > 2014-07-09 2:40 GMT-03:00 Sebastian <sebas5384 at gmail.com>:
> >
> >> Hey there!
> >>
> >> After I did the Drupal charm, part of my plan was that the developers
> now
> >> can use the juju-local with lxc containers to deploy every project
> >> environment using bundles.
> >>
> >> But! we notice a BIG difference of performance in the containers, so we
> >> run a PHP benchmarking script:
> >>
> >> Host (vbox):
> >> vagrant at vagrant-ubuntu-trusty-64:~$ php bench.php
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> test_math                 : 3.190 sec.
> >> test_stringmanipulation   : 2.859 sec.
> >> test_loops                : 1.702 sec.
> >> test_ifelse               : 1.319 sec.
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> Total time:               : 9.07 sec.
> >>
> >> Lxc container (into the vbox):
> >> ubuntu at vagrant-local-machine-4:~$ php bench.php
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> test_math                 : 37.062 sec.
> >> test_stringmanipulation   : 30.826 sec.
> >> test_loops                : 5.749 sec.
> >> test_ifelse               : 6.149 sec.
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> Total time:               : 79.786 sec.
> >>
> >>
> >> As you can see, the containers created by Juju took 70 seconds more than
> >> the host.
> >> The versions of the php where the same, and this was also tested in bare
> >> metal, to ensure that the virtualization of the host wasn't the issue.
> >>
> >> We understand how this impact the implementation of Juju as a complete
> >> solution for devs and ops. Is not everyone that can buy a super
> computer to
> >> virtualize each charm, in his local notebook. So that's why I'm here,
> >> telling our story.
> >>
> >> Maybe this is an issue that belongs to the LXC group, but I thought
> >> interesting to share this.
> >>
> >> If someone can do the same benchmarkings and share the results, or any
> >> help to make things better, please!! it's more than welcome.
> >>
> >> Cheers!,
> >> Sebas.
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juju mailing list
> > Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20140710/dfaaec6b/attachment.html>