summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffhomepage
path: root/content/docs
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAdin Scannell <ascannell@google.com>2019-05-13 15:12:03 -0700
committerAdin Scannell <adin@scannell.ca>2019-05-13 15:27:34 -0700
commit9ea68ce1655ddadc8e3ca4c65fd2922d2564b33d (patch)
tree1786168a13eff022e520c21f39ffff09f2c3893b /content/docs
parent5b3f25047fe8dd4d04262ea56c38a134291d0067 (diff)
Drop confusing kvm-bare syscall time
The difference is only due to different machines.
Diffstat (limited to 'content/docs')
-rw-r--r--content/docs/architecture_guide/performance.md15
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 8 deletions
diff --git a/content/docs/architecture_guide/performance.md b/content/docs/architecture_guide/performance.md
index f31baa5e1..f246b5d5c 100644
--- a/content/docs/architecture_guide/performance.md
+++ b/content/docs/architecture_guide/performance.md
@@ -85,22 +85,21 @@ For many use cases, fixed memory overheads are a primary concern. This may be
because sandboxed containers handle a low volume of requests, and it is
therefore important to achieve high densities for efficiency.
-{{< graph id="density" url="/performance/density.csv" title="perf.py density --runtime=runc --runtime=runsc" log="true" y_min="100000">}}
+{{< graph id="density" url="/performance/density.csv" title="perf.py density --runtime=runc --runtime=runsc" log="true" y_min="100000" >}}
The above figure demonstrates these costs based on three sample applications.
This test is the result of running many instances of a container (typically 50)
and calculating available memory on the host before and afterwards, and dividing
-the difference by the number of containers.
-
-> Note: the above technique is used for measuring memory usage over the
-> `usage_in_bytes` value of the container cgroup because we found that some
-> container runtimes, other than `runc` and `runsc` do not use an individual
-> container cgroup.
+the difference by the number of containers. This technique is used for measuring
+memory usage over the `usage_in_bytes` value of the container cgroup because we
+found that some container runtimes, other than `runc` and `runsc`, do not use an
+individual container cgroup.
The first application is an instance of `sleep`: a trivial application that does
nothing. The second application is a synthetic `node` application which imports
a number of modules and listens for requests. The third application is a similar
-synthetic `ruby` application which does the same. In all cases, the sandbox
+synthetic `ruby` application which does the same. Finally, we include an
+instance of `redis` storing approximately 1GB of data. In all cases, the sandbox
itself is responsible for a small, mostly fixed amount of memory overhead.
## CPU performance