Light Reading
We test the network performance of the Cisco UCS's Virtual Machine Fabric Extender

Virtual Machine Fabric Extender Performance

Light Reading
Series Column
Light Reading
1/29/2012
50%
50%

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Cisco UCS’s Virtual Machine Fabric Extender (VM-FEX) offers consistently increased network performance operations compared to virtual distributed switch installations.


In a standard Local Area Network, various hosts, laptops and PCs typically connect to a Layer 2 switch that aggregates the physical stations before handing them off to a router. Communication between two hosts on the same LAN can be done directly without reaching the router. Similarly, a virtual switching instance passes traffic either to a VM sitting in the same hardware, or pushes it out the physical port. Virtual Switches (such as the Cisco Nexus 1000v or VMware’s vNetwork Distributed Switch) operations are done in software and Virtual Switches (such as the Cisco Nexus 1000v or VMware’s vNetwork Distributed Switch) operations are done in software and therefore take resources away from the virtual machines hosted on the blade. Reducing the amount of resources available to the VMs.

Cisco's Nexus 1000v has a rich set of capabilities such as VLAN aggregation, forwarding policies and security. Cisco, however, found that not all VM installations require these features, and in such cases it makes sense to save the resources taken by the virtual switch and appropriate them to the customer needs.

Cisco claimed that their Virtual Machine Fabric Extender (VM-FEX) in VMDirect mode replaces the switch and shows a significant increase in CPU performance for network intensive applications. VM-FEX, installed on VMWare ESX 5.0, enables all VM traffic to be automatically sent out on the UCS's Virtual Interface Card (VIC). This meant more traffic on the physical blade network interface, but reduced CPU usage, which is typically the VM bottleneck. To verify that the VM-FEX really frees up CPU resources, we ran a series of tests comparing a VM-FEX-enabled UCS blade to a Nexus 1000v virtual switch setup. Both UCS blade installations were identical in all aspects apart from the use of the VM-FEX in one and Nexus 1000v in the other.

We started comparing the performance between the two setups using Ixia’s virtual tools. We installed four Ixia IxNetwork VMs on each of the two UCS blades and sent 3,333 Mbit/s of traffic from each of the first three VMs, toward the fourth for 120 seconds using 1,500-byte frames. In the VM-FEX case we recorded 2.186 percent frame loss, while in the distributed switch environment we recorded 16.19 percent frame loss.

We expected loss in both cases, given the almost 10Gbit/s load we were transmitting in the virtual space. The load was required in order to really keep the CPU busy. We deduced from this initial test result that in the VM-FEX environment less resources were used, which is why the frame loss we recorded was smaller than the loss recorded in the virtual distributed switch setup.

For the next test setup we installed one IxLoad VM on each of the two blades. We configured both IxLoad VMs as HTTP clients that requested traffic from a Web server Cisco configured. The IxLoad emulated clients were configured to try and use as much bandwidth as possible by requesting 10 different objects from 10 URLs repeatedly. The VM-FEX setup reached 9.87 Gbit/s while the distributed switch reached 7.78 Gbit/s. The CPU usage was also significantly higher in the virtual distributed switch setup when compared to the VM-FEX setup.

Using the Ixia test tools we recorded the performance difference we expected. Cisco recommended that we perform a test that relies more heavily on the Storage Area Network (SAN). For this test, Cisco helped us to set up 10 VMs on each of the two setups, and install IOmeter on each virtual machine. IOmeter was configured to read blocks from an iSCSI-based SAN as fast as it possibly could. We manually started each of the twenty IOmeter instances, and after 10 minutes we manually stopped each of them. At the end, we looked at three statistics -- Input/Output Operations per Second, Data Rate, and Average Response Time -- all three averaged across the 10 VMs in each setup. The VM-FEX performance was indeed higher for all three metrics. The data is shown in the graph below:

We were still curious what the difference would be when someone is running a common task on a single VM. We wrote a script to use the open source program mplayer to encode a DVD image file that was stored in the SAN into mpeg (for private use of course). We wrote two versions of the script -- one performed an additional round of encoding. The results of this test run actually showed that the act of fetching blocks off the network-attached DVD were not too resource intensive as the VM-FEX setup required only marginally less time to perform the encoding than the virtual distributed switch setup.

Perhaps the most interesting metric was not the performance, but rather the CPU utilization. How much of the CPU was used for the operation, and how much was left over for other operations and other users? As shown below, the VM-FEX setup used far less of CPU resources in all cases. This was expected, since the CPU was skipping an entire layer of virtual switching, and this was, after all, exactly what Cisco wanted to demonstrate.


Next Page: Virtual Security Gateway
Previous Page: Unified Fabric (UF) – UCS Manager


Back to the Cisco Test Main Page

(0)  | 
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Flash Poll
From The Founder
It's clear to me that the communications industry is divided into two types of people, and only one is living in the real world.
LRTV Custom TV
Using Service Quality to Drive WiFi Monetization

10|22|14   |   6:51   |   (0) comments


Live from the SCTE conference: Heavy Reading's Alan Breznick explores the forces shaping the WiFi opportunity in an interview with CableLabs' Justin Colwell and Amdocs' Ken Roulier.
LRTV Custom TV
Distributed Access Architectures – 2

10|21|14   |   8:51:00 AM   |   (0) comments


ARRIS CTO Network Solutions Tom Cloonan discusses why many if not most MSOs will continue with integrated CCAP, while addressing why some are also looking at two futuristic, distributed access architectures: Remote PHY and Remote CCAP.
LRTV Custom TV
Distributed Access Architectures – 1

10|21|14   |   9:01   |   (0) comments


SCTE Sr. Director of Engineering Dean Stoneback discusses the pros and cons of distributed access architecture (DAA) and its various forms, which range from basic Remote PHY to full CMTS functionality in the node.
LRTV Custom TV
The WiFi Road to Riches – 2

10|21|14   |   3:58   |   (0) comments


ARRIS Senior Solution Architect Eli Baruch talks about how MSOs can enable public and community WiFi through 1) outdoor access points, 2) businesses seeking to offer WiFi to customers, and 3) residential WiFi gateway extensions.
LRTV Custom TV
The WiFi Road to Riches – 1

10|21|14   |   10:15   |   (0) comments


SCTE Director of Advanced Technologies Steve Harris discusses WiFi deployments, drivers, challenges and advances, including 802.11ac, carrier-grade WiFi, community WiFi, Hotspot 2.0, Passpoint, WiFi-First and voice-over-WiFi.
LRTV Custom TV
Advantech Accelerates 100G Traffic Handling

10|17|14   |   7:56   |   (0) comments


Paul Stevens from Advantech explains why handling 100GbE needs a whole new platform design approach and how Advantech is addressing the needs of equipment providers and carriers to give them the flexibility and performance they will need for SDN and NFV deployment.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Holland's Imtech Traffic & Infra Discusses Huawei's ICT Solution and Services

10|16|14   |   4:49   |   (0) comments


Dimitry Theebe is from the business unit at Imtech Traffic & Infra which delivers communications solutions for transportations. His partnershp with Huawei began about a years ago. In this video, Theebe speaks more about this partnership and what he hopes to accomplish with Huawei.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Huawei's Comprehensive Storage Solutions Vital for SVR

10|16|14   |   6:16   |   (0) comments


SVR Information Technology provides cloud services for academic and special sectors. With Huawei's support, SVR and Yildiz Technical University has established Turkey's largest and most advanced High Performance Computing system. CSO Ismail Cem Aslan talks about what he hopes Huawei's OceanStor storage system will bring for him.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Mexico's Servitron's Impression of Huawei at CCW 2014

10|16|14   |   6:35   |   (0) comments


Servitron is a network operator in Mexico that has been in the trunking industry for the past 20 years. Its COO, Ing. Ragnar Trillo O., explains at Critical Communications World 2014 that his company has been interested in the long-term evolution of LTE technology and its adoption for TETRA.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Building a Better Dubai

10|16|14   |   2:06   |   (0) comments


Abdulla Ahmed Al Falasi is the director of commercial affairs, a telecommunications coordinator for the government of Dubai. Their areas of service span across multiple industries, including police, safety, shopping malls and more. In this video, Abdulla talks about his department's work with Huawei.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Huawei Lights Up Malaysia Partner Maju Nusa

10|16|14   |   1:59   |   (0) comments


Malaysia's Maju Nusa is an enterprise partner to Huawei in networking, route switches and telco equipment. At this year's Critical Communications World in Singapore, CTO Pushpender Singh talks about what Huawei's eLTE solutions mean to his company and for Malaysia.
LRTV Custom TV
Evolving From HFC to FTTH Networks

10|15|14   |   2:19   |   (0) comments


Cisco's Todd McCrum delves into the future of cable's HFC plant, examining how DOCSIS 3.1 and advanced video compression will extend its life and how the IP video transition will usher in GPON and EPON over FTTH.
Upcoming Live Events
October 29, 2014, New York City
November 6, 2014, Santa Clara
November 11, 2014, Atlanta, GA
December 2, 2014, New York City
December 3, 2014, New York City
December 9-10, 2014, Reykjavik, Iceland
February 10, 2015, Atlanta, GA
June 9-10, 2015, Chicago, IL
Infographics
WhoIsHostingThis.com presents six of the world's most extreme WiFi hotspots, enabling the most epic selfies you can imagine.
Hot Topics
Analysts Warn of Major NFV Gaps
Carol Wilson, Editor-at-large, 10/22/2014
Google: Carriers & Cloud Providers Need to Cooperate
Mitch Wagner, West Coast Bureau Chief, Light Reading, 10/16/2014
iPad Air 2 Lets Users Switch Carriers Any Time
Mitch Wagner, West Coast Bureau Chief, Light Reading, 10/17/2014
CBS Takes OTT Plunge
Mari Silbey, Independent Technology Editor, 10/16/2014
Is Health the Killer App for the IoT?
Jason Meyers, Senior Editor, Gigabit Cities/IoT, 10/22/2014
Like Us on Facebook
Twitter Feed