tests: add simple storage performance tests #649
+723
−0
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add simple connection latency, and throughput tests. Run them with different type of services (scripts, socket, via fork-server or not). They print a test run time for comparison - the lower the better. The tests can be also started outside of the full test run by calling /usr/lib/qubes/tests/qrexec_perf.py. It requires giving names of two existing and running VMs. QubesOS/qubes-issues#5740
marmarek
force-pushed
the
storage-perf
branch
from
8470828 to
129be05
Compare
Add few simple storage performance tests using fio tool. Tests are checking dom0's root and varlibqubes pools (by default the same thing, but in case of XFS or BTRFS setups, they are different). And VM's root/private/volatile. The last one is tested by creating ext4 filesystem there first. This isn't very representative (normally volatile is used for swap and CoW data), but allows comparing results with other volumes. The tests can be also started outside of the full test run by calling /usr/lib/qubes/tests/storage_perf.py. It requires giving name of a VM to test (which may be dom0). QubesOS/qubes-issues#5740
marmarek
force-pushed
the
storage-perf
branch
from
129be05 to
664c5dd
Compare
OpenQA test summaryComplete test suite and dependencies: https://openqa.qubes-os.org/tests/overview?distri=qubesos&version=4.3&build=2025012904-4.3&flavor=pull-requests Test run included the following:
Installing updates failed, skipping the report! |
This was referenced Jan 26, 2025
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #649 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 69.78% 69.71% -0.07%
==========================================
Files 58 58
Lines 12499 12499
==========================================
- Hits 8722 8714 -8
- Misses 3777 3785 +8
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
Aims to iterate in goal of fixing QubesOS/qubes-issues#7300 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Add few simple storage performance tests using fio tool. Tests are checking
dom0's root and varlibqubes pools (by default the same thing, but in case
of XFS or BTRFS setups, they are different). And VM's
root/private/volatile. The last one is tested by creating ext4 filesystem
there first. This isn't very representative
(normally volatile is used for swap and CoW data), but allows comparing
results with other volumes.
The tests can be also started outside of the full test run by calling
/usr/lib/qubes/tests/storage_perf.py. It requires giving name of a VM to
test (which may be dom0).
QubesOS/qubes-issues#5740
This PR is on top of #647