Linux /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches in guest VMsVirtualization: Guest in guest?Will a SSD cache increase Native ZFS performance for me?Is it safe to use up all memory on linux server, not leaving anything for the cache?Write caching in linuxWhat are the performance implications of running VMs on a ZFS host?Is there disk based file system with dedicated memory caching for Linux?How do I prevent ntfs-3g use starving my ZFS ARC of memory?Is there a way to limit the “buffer” memory use in Linux?qemu-kvm reclamation of memory from low-use guestsOptimal ARC and L2ARC settings for purpose specific storage application
How can one's career as a reviewer be ended?
Next date with distinct digits
How to learn Linux system internals
I've been given a project I can't complete, what should I do?
Why did Intel abandon unified CPU cache?
60s or 70s novel about Empire of Man making 1st contact with 1st discovered alien race
If there's something that implicates the president why is there then a national security issue? (John Dowd)
Is it safe to change the harddrive power feature so that it never turns off?
Non-aqueous eyes?
Why can I traceroute to this IP address, but not ping?
Does the new finding on "reversing a quantum jump mid-flight" rule out any interpretations of QM?
Has there been a multiethnic Star Trek character?
Does Assassinate grant two attacks?
Why was this person allowed to become Grand Maester?
What are some really overused phrases in French that are common nowadays?
What is this airplane?
Are polynomials with the same roots identical?
What aircraft was used as Air Force One for the flight between Southampton and Shannon?
How to make insert mode mapping count as multiple undos?
Live action TV show where High school Kids go into the virtual world and have to clear levels
Why is there always a fire truck present before refuelling?
What are neighboring ports?
Is there a DSLR/mirorless camera with minimal options like a classic, simple SLR?
How creative should the DM let an artificer be in terms of what they can build?
Linux /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches in guest VMs
Virtualization: Guest in guest?Will a SSD cache increase Native ZFS performance for me?Is it safe to use up all memory on linux server, not leaving anything for the cache?Write caching in linuxWhat are the performance implications of running VMs on a ZFS host?Is there disk based file system with dedicated memory caching for Linux?How do I prevent ntfs-3g use starving my ZFS ARC of memory?Is there a way to limit the “buffer” memory use in Linux?qemu-kvm reclamation of memory from low-use guestsOptimal ARC and L2ARC settings for purpose specific storage application
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
Question:
Would it ever be a good idea to disable page cache inside guest VM's and instead rely on the ZFS ARC (and SSD based L2ARC) of the host?
Context:
I'm asking since I'm running a Proxmox cluster which is always showing around 90% use of RAM for all VM's, regardless of how much it actually needs. This is to be expected due to the guest kernel's use of page cache. Since I've been hearing a lot of good things about ZFS's ARC it got me thinking that perhaps I could increase the reliance on those and reduce the reliance on the page cache of the guests. In essence the ARC would kind of be a shared page cache for all VM's.
By doing this I would get the additional benefit of more accurate proxmox statistics and graphs, thus giving me a better picture on how much memory each VM actually needs. This in turn would give me the information I need in order to better tune the sizes of each VM's RAM and allow me to increase the size of the host's ARC by the same amount.
I haven't actually tried any of this, I thought I would run it by you guys first. So, am I stupid for thinking this way?
Follow up question: HOW would I go about disabling (or limiting) the page cache in a Linux VM? ONE method would be to use a cronjob and regularly write "3" to /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, like once every minute or something. But it feels kinda hacky, isn't there a better way?
P.S. Yes I realize that I'm only talking about read cache, not write cache which is affected by the amount of dirty pages. So I would probably still need some amount free RAM space to allow for that (but that should be visible in the VM's RAM usage statistics in Proxmox, so everything above should still apply).
linux kvm-virtualization zfs proxmox disk-cache
add a comment |
Question:
Would it ever be a good idea to disable page cache inside guest VM's and instead rely on the ZFS ARC (and SSD based L2ARC) of the host?
Context:
I'm asking since I'm running a Proxmox cluster which is always showing around 90% use of RAM for all VM's, regardless of how much it actually needs. This is to be expected due to the guest kernel's use of page cache. Since I've been hearing a lot of good things about ZFS's ARC it got me thinking that perhaps I could increase the reliance on those and reduce the reliance on the page cache of the guests. In essence the ARC would kind of be a shared page cache for all VM's.
By doing this I would get the additional benefit of more accurate proxmox statistics and graphs, thus giving me a better picture on how much memory each VM actually needs. This in turn would give me the information I need in order to better tune the sizes of each VM's RAM and allow me to increase the size of the host's ARC by the same amount.
I haven't actually tried any of this, I thought I would run it by you guys first. So, am I stupid for thinking this way?
Follow up question: HOW would I go about disabling (or limiting) the page cache in a Linux VM? ONE method would be to use a cronjob and regularly write "3" to /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, like once every minute or something. But it feels kinda hacky, isn't there a better way?
P.S. Yes I realize that I'm only talking about read cache, not write cache which is affected by the amount of dirty pages. So I would probably still need some amount free RAM space to allow for that (but that should be visible in the VM's RAM usage statistics in Proxmox, so everything above should still apply).
linux kvm-virtualization zfs proxmox disk-cache
Are your VMs short on RAM? Is everything right-sized?
– ewwhite
May 24 at 15:07
No, they have more than they need, which is actually (kind of) the point of the question.
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 15:26
Why would you want to hurt your VMs' performance in this way?
– Michael Hampton♦
May 24 at 17:19
But that's the main point of the question, why would it hurt my VM's performance? Unless I have missunderstood how this works (which I might have, which is why I asked the question in the first place) I'm simply moving the page cache outside of the VM but not actually moving it outside of RAM, right? So it should be the same performance?
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 17:51
1
If you memory limit your VMs or use a balloon driver this basically happens automatically, page cache and buffer cache will shrink to a minimum. Not having any cache won’t be very efficient since you still want to reduce roundtrips by having multi block reads or read ahead and also async flushes. Also the host cache will mostly benefit shared blocks (shared snapshot bases) only.
– eckes
May 25 at 10:59
add a comment |
Question:
Would it ever be a good idea to disable page cache inside guest VM's and instead rely on the ZFS ARC (and SSD based L2ARC) of the host?
Context:
I'm asking since I'm running a Proxmox cluster which is always showing around 90% use of RAM for all VM's, regardless of how much it actually needs. This is to be expected due to the guest kernel's use of page cache. Since I've been hearing a lot of good things about ZFS's ARC it got me thinking that perhaps I could increase the reliance on those and reduce the reliance on the page cache of the guests. In essence the ARC would kind of be a shared page cache for all VM's.
By doing this I would get the additional benefit of more accurate proxmox statistics and graphs, thus giving me a better picture on how much memory each VM actually needs. This in turn would give me the information I need in order to better tune the sizes of each VM's RAM and allow me to increase the size of the host's ARC by the same amount.
I haven't actually tried any of this, I thought I would run it by you guys first. So, am I stupid for thinking this way?
Follow up question: HOW would I go about disabling (or limiting) the page cache in a Linux VM? ONE method would be to use a cronjob and regularly write "3" to /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, like once every minute or something. But it feels kinda hacky, isn't there a better way?
P.S. Yes I realize that I'm only talking about read cache, not write cache which is affected by the amount of dirty pages. So I would probably still need some amount free RAM space to allow for that (but that should be visible in the VM's RAM usage statistics in Proxmox, so everything above should still apply).
linux kvm-virtualization zfs proxmox disk-cache
Question:
Would it ever be a good idea to disable page cache inside guest VM's and instead rely on the ZFS ARC (and SSD based L2ARC) of the host?
Context:
I'm asking since I'm running a Proxmox cluster which is always showing around 90% use of RAM for all VM's, regardless of how much it actually needs. This is to be expected due to the guest kernel's use of page cache. Since I've been hearing a lot of good things about ZFS's ARC it got me thinking that perhaps I could increase the reliance on those and reduce the reliance on the page cache of the guests. In essence the ARC would kind of be a shared page cache for all VM's.
By doing this I would get the additional benefit of more accurate proxmox statistics and graphs, thus giving me a better picture on how much memory each VM actually needs. This in turn would give me the information I need in order to better tune the sizes of each VM's RAM and allow me to increase the size of the host's ARC by the same amount.
I haven't actually tried any of this, I thought I would run it by you guys first. So, am I stupid for thinking this way?
Follow up question: HOW would I go about disabling (or limiting) the page cache in a Linux VM? ONE method would be to use a cronjob and regularly write "3" to /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, like once every minute or something. But it feels kinda hacky, isn't there a better way?
P.S. Yes I realize that I'm only talking about read cache, not write cache which is affected by the amount of dirty pages. So I would probably still need some amount free RAM space to allow for that (but that should be visible in the VM's RAM usage statistics in Proxmox, so everything above should still apply).
linux kvm-virtualization zfs proxmox disk-cache
linux kvm-virtualization zfs proxmox disk-cache
asked May 24 at 14:50
A. NilssonA. Nilsson
56846
56846
Are your VMs short on RAM? Is everything right-sized?
– ewwhite
May 24 at 15:07
No, they have more than they need, which is actually (kind of) the point of the question.
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 15:26
Why would you want to hurt your VMs' performance in this way?
– Michael Hampton♦
May 24 at 17:19
But that's the main point of the question, why would it hurt my VM's performance? Unless I have missunderstood how this works (which I might have, which is why I asked the question in the first place) I'm simply moving the page cache outside of the VM but not actually moving it outside of RAM, right? So it should be the same performance?
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 17:51
1
If you memory limit your VMs or use a balloon driver this basically happens automatically, page cache and buffer cache will shrink to a minimum. Not having any cache won’t be very efficient since you still want to reduce roundtrips by having multi block reads or read ahead and also async flushes. Also the host cache will mostly benefit shared blocks (shared snapshot bases) only.
– eckes
May 25 at 10:59
add a comment |
Are your VMs short on RAM? Is everything right-sized?
– ewwhite
May 24 at 15:07
No, they have more than they need, which is actually (kind of) the point of the question.
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 15:26
Why would you want to hurt your VMs' performance in this way?
– Michael Hampton♦
May 24 at 17:19
But that's the main point of the question, why would it hurt my VM's performance? Unless I have missunderstood how this works (which I might have, which is why I asked the question in the first place) I'm simply moving the page cache outside of the VM but not actually moving it outside of RAM, right? So it should be the same performance?
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 17:51
1
If you memory limit your VMs or use a balloon driver this basically happens automatically, page cache and buffer cache will shrink to a minimum. Not having any cache won’t be very efficient since you still want to reduce roundtrips by having multi block reads or read ahead and also async flushes. Also the host cache will mostly benefit shared blocks (shared snapshot bases) only.
– eckes
May 25 at 10:59
Are your VMs short on RAM? Is everything right-sized?
– ewwhite
May 24 at 15:07
Are your VMs short on RAM? Is everything right-sized?
– ewwhite
May 24 at 15:07
No, they have more than they need, which is actually (kind of) the point of the question.
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 15:26
No, they have more than they need, which is actually (kind of) the point of the question.
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 15:26
Why would you want to hurt your VMs' performance in this way?
– Michael Hampton♦
May 24 at 17:19
Why would you want to hurt your VMs' performance in this way?
– Michael Hampton♦
May 24 at 17:19
But that's the main point of the question, why would it hurt my VM's performance? Unless I have missunderstood how this works (which I might have, which is why I asked the question in the first place) I'm simply moving the page cache outside of the VM but not actually moving it outside of RAM, right? So it should be the same performance?
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 17:51
But that's the main point of the question, why would it hurt my VM's performance? Unless I have missunderstood how this works (which I might have, which is why I asked the question in the first place) I'm simply moving the page cache outside of the VM but not actually moving it outside of RAM, right? So it should be the same performance?
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 17:51
1
1
If you memory limit your VMs or use a balloon driver this basically happens automatically, page cache and buffer cache will shrink to a minimum. Not having any cache won’t be very efficient since you still want to reduce roundtrips by having multi block reads or read ahead and also async flushes. Also the host cache will mostly benefit shared blocks (shared snapshot bases) only.
– eckes
May 25 at 10:59
If you memory limit your VMs or use a balloon driver this basically happens automatically, page cache and buffer cache will shrink to a minimum. Not having any cache won’t be very efficient since you still want to reduce roundtrips by having multi block reads or read ahead and also async flushes. Also the host cache will mostly benefit shared blocks (shared snapshot bases) only.
– eckes
May 25 at 10:59
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
I often (but not always, see below) optimize my hypervisors similar to what you suggest: let VMs to heavily relay on shared host disk cache.
However, using the drop_caches approach seems too heavy-handed to me, as it can evict too much cache memory from guest. At the same time, I don't know any method to limit pagecache (short of configuring your application for using direct I/O). So, the key is to correctly size your VM RAM resources: try to assign only the memory a guest really needs, plus 1 or 2 GB for having some "breathing room".
Managing memory in this manner has some important advantages:
- being managed by the host, cache memory can be dynamically allocated to guests based on their I/O requirements;
- by the virtue of being dynamically managed, treating your memory as a true resource pool, you reduce wasted resources and increase efficiency;
- if using ZFS on your host, you tap into the very advanced ARC/L2ARC and its trash-resistant behavior
But there are some disvantages as well:
- being a shared resource, your host cache memory can be trashed by a rogue VM (impacting other, more important, VMs);
- being located some context switches and
vmexit/vmenteraway, the peak and sustained speed of any host-based cache will be lower than the corrispettive guest-side cache (and this is the reason I suggest you to avoid repeateddrop_cachesin the guest); - albeit more advanced and with much higher hit-rate, ARC is slower than linux pagecache when the workload fits entirely in cache. So, for maximum guest speed on performance-critical guests, you probably want to give to the VM sufficient memory for pagecache.
Thank you, this was the kind of nuanced information I was looking for! I knew I was oversimplifying the issue somehow, but I wasn't clear on the details.
– A. Nilsson
May 25 at 19:05
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f968727%2flinux-proc-sys-vm-drop-caches-in-guest-vms%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I often (but not always, see below) optimize my hypervisors similar to what you suggest: let VMs to heavily relay on shared host disk cache.
However, using the drop_caches approach seems too heavy-handed to me, as it can evict too much cache memory from guest. At the same time, I don't know any method to limit pagecache (short of configuring your application for using direct I/O). So, the key is to correctly size your VM RAM resources: try to assign only the memory a guest really needs, plus 1 or 2 GB for having some "breathing room".
Managing memory in this manner has some important advantages:
- being managed by the host, cache memory can be dynamically allocated to guests based on their I/O requirements;
- by the virtue of being dynamically managed, treating your memory as a true resource pool, you reduce wasted resources and increase efficiency;
- if using ZFS on your host, you tap into the very advanced ARC/L2ARC and its trash-resistant behavior
But there are some disvantages as well:
- being a shared resource, your host cache memory can be trashed by a rogue VM (impacting other, more important, VMs);
- being located some context switches and
vmexit/vmenteraway, the peak and sustained speed of any host-based cache will be lower than the corrispettive guest-side cache (and this is the reason I suggest you to avoid repeateddrop_cachesin the guest); - albeit more advanced and with much higher hit-rate, ARC is slower than linux pagecache when the workload fits entirely in cache. So, for maximum guest speed on performance-critical guests, you probably want to give to the VM sufficient memory for pagecache.
Thank you, this was the kind of nuanced information I was looking for! I knew I was oversimplifying the issue somehow, but I wasn't clear on the details.
– A. Nilsson
May 25 at 19:05
add a comment |
I often (but not always, see below) optimize my hypervisors similar to what you suggest: let VMs to heavily relay on shared host disk cache.
However, using the drop_caches approach seems too heavy-handed to me, as it can evict too much cache memory from guest. At the same time, I don't know any method to limit pagecache (short of configuring your application for using direct I/O). So, the key is to correctly size your VM RAM resources: try to assign only the memory a guest really needs, plus 1 or 2 GB for having some "breathing room".
Managing memory in this manner has some important advantages:
- being managed by the host, cache memory can be dynamically allocated to guests based on their I/O requirements;
- by the virtue of being dynamically managed, treating your memory as a true resource pool, you reduce wasted resources and increase efficiency;
- if using ZFS on your host, you tap into the very advanced ARC/L2ARC and its trash-resistant behavior
But there are some disvantages as well:
- being a shared resource, your host cache memory can be trashed by a rogue VM (impacting other, more important, VMs);
- being located some context switches and
vmexit/vmenteraway, the peak and sustained speed of any host-based cache will be lower than the corrispettive guest-side cache (and this is the reason I suggest you to avoid repeateddrop_cachesin the guest); - albeit more advanced and with much higher hit-rate, ARC is slower than linux pagecache when the workload fits entirely in cache. So, for maximum guest speed on performance-critical guests, you probably want to give to the VM sufficient memory for pagecache.
Thank you, this was the kind of nuanced information I was looking for! I knew I was oversimplifying the issue somehow, but I wasn't clear on the details.
– A. Nilsson
May 25 at 19:05
add a comment |
I often (but not always, see below) optimize my hypervisors similar to what you suggest: let VMs to heavily relay on shared host disk cache.
However, using the drop_caches approach seems too heavy-handed to me, as it can evict too much cache memory from guest. At the same time, I don't know any method to limit pagecache (short of configuring your application for using direct I/O). So, the key is to correctly size your VM RAM resources: try to assign only the memory a guest really needs, plus 1 or 2 GB for having some "breathing room".
Managing memory in this manner has some important advantages:
- being managed by the host, cache memory can be dynamically allocated to guests based on their I/O requirements;
- by the virtue of being dynamically managed, treating your memory as a true resource pool, you reduce wasted resources and increase efficiency;
- if using ZFS on your host, you tap into the very advanced ARC/L2ARC and its trash-resistant behavior
But there are some disvantages as well:
- being a shared resource, your host cache memory can be trashed by a rogue VM (impacting other, more important, VMs);
- being located some context switches and
vmexit/vmenteraway, the peak and sustained speed of any host-based cache will be lower than the corrispettive guest-side cache (and this is the reason I suggest you to avoid repeateddrop_cachesin the guest); - albeit more advanced and with much higher hit-rate, ARC is slower than linux pagecache when the workload fits entirely in cache. So, for maximum guest speed on performance-critical guests, you probably want to give to the VM sufficient memory for pagecache.
I often (but not always, see below) optimize my hypervisors similar to what you suggest: let VMs to heavily relay on shared host disk cache.
However, using the drop_caches approach seems too heavy-handed to me, as it can evict too much cache memory from guest. At the same time, I don't know any method to limit pagecache (short of configuring your application for using direct I/O). So, the key is to correctly size your VM RAM resources: try to assign only the memory a guest really needs, plus 1 or 2 GB for having some "breathing room".
Managing memory in this manner has some important advantages:
- being managed by the host, cache memory can be dynamically allocated to guests based on their I/O requirements;
- by the virtue of being dynamically managed, treating your memory as a true resource pool, you reduce wasted resources and increase efficiency;
- if using ZFS on your host, you tap into the very advanced ARC/L2ARC and its trash-resistant behavior
But there are some disvantages as well:
- being a shared resource, your host cache memory can be trashed by a rogue VM (impacting other, more important, VMs);
- being located some context switches and
vmexit/vmenteraway, the peak and sustained speed of any host-based cache will be lower than the corrispettive guest-side cache (and this is the reason I suggest you to avoid repeateddrop_cachesin the guest); - albeit more advanced and with much higher hit-rate, ARC is slower than linux pagecache when the workload fits entirely in cache. So, for maximum guest speed on performance-critical guests, you probably want to give to the VM sufficient memory for pagecache.
answered May 24 at 18:49
shodanshokshodanshok
27.9k35194
27.9k35194
Thank you, this was the kind of nuanced information I was looking for! I knew I was oversimplifying the issue somehow, but I wasn't clear on the details.
– A. Nilsson
May 25 at 19:05
add a comment |
Thank you, this was the kind of nuanced information I was looking for! I knew I was oversimplifying the issue somehow, but I wasn't clear on the details.
– A. Nilsson
May 25 at 19:05
Thank you, this was the kind of nuanced information I was looking for! I knew I was oversimplifying the issue somehow, but I wasn't clear on the details.
– A. Nilsson
May 25 at 19:05
Thank you, this was the kind of nuanced information I was looking for! I knew I was oversimplifying the issue somehow, but I wasn't clear on the details.
– A. Nilsson
May 25 at 19:05
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f968727%2flinux-proc-sys-vm-drop-caches-in-guest-vms%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Are your VMs short on RAM? Is everything right-sized?
– ewwhite
May 24 at 15:07
No, they have more than they need, which is actually (kind of) the point of the question.
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 15:26
Why would you want to hurt your VMs' performance in this way?
– Michael Hampton♦
May 24 at 17:19
But that's the main point of the question, why would it hurt my VM's performance? Unless I have missunderstood how this works (which I might have, which is why I asked the question in the first place) I'm simply moving the page cache outside of the VM but not actually moving it outside of RAM, right? So it should be the same performance?
– A. Nilsson
May 24 at 17:51
1
If you memory limit your VMs or use a balloon driver this basically happens automatically, page cache and buffer cache will shrink to a minimum. Not having any cache won’t be very efficient since you still want to reduce roundtrips by having multi block reads or read ahead and also async flushes. Also the host cache will mostly benefit shared blocks (shared snapshot bases) only.
– eckes
May 25 at 10:59