KVM CPU share / priority / overselling - virtualization

i have question about KVM i could not find any satisfying answer in the net about.
Lets say i want to create 3 virtual machines on a host with 2 CPUs. I am assigning 1 cpu to 1 virtual machines. The other 2 virtual machines should be sharing 1 cpu. If it is possible i want to give 1 vm 30 % and the other one 70% of the cpu.
I know this does not make much sense but i am curious and want to test is :-)
I know that hypervisors like onapp can do that. But how do they do it?

KVM represents each virtual CPU as a thread in the host Linux system, actually as a thread in the QEMU process. So scheduling of guest VCPUs is controlled by the Linux scheduler.
On Linux, you can use taskset to force specific threads onto specific CPUs. So that will let you assign one VCPU to one physical CPU and two VCPUs to another. See, for example, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/linuxkernelnewbies/qs5IiIA4xnw.
As far as controlling what percent of the CPU each VM gets, Linux has several scheduling policies available, but I'm not familiar with them. Any information you can find on how to control scheduling of Linux processes will apply to KVM.
The answers to this question may help: https://serverfault.com/questions/313333/kvm-and-virtual-to-physical-cpu-mapping. (Also that forum may be a better place for this question, since this one is intended for programming questions.)
If you search for "KVM virtual CPU scheduling" and "Linux CPU scheduling" (without the quotes), you should find plenty of additional information.


Virtualize all cpu cores on a guest with a virtual single core

Suppose that we have a guest OS that allows support only for a single core.
We have an host with N=2^K cores with a virtualization solution that allows to provide all such cores to our guest.
The guest will see only one core while using most of the computational resources of host's N cores.
Is it possible, with actual technologies, to have such a transparent allocation of CPU cores to guest?
P.S. Found an old answer to this question on serverfault
No. Such technology does not exist ATM. If it did, everyone would be using it.

Difference between CPU Usage and CPU Utilization?

I was wondering if there is a scientific differentiation in terminology when speaking of CPU Usage and CPU Utilization. I have the feeling that both words are used as synonyms. They both describe the relation between CPU Time and CPU Capacity. Wikipedia calls it CPU Usage. Microsoft uses CPU Utilization. But I also found an article where Microsoft uses the term CPU Usage. Now VMware defines to use CPU Utilization in the context of physical CPUs and CPU Usage in the context of logical CPUs. Also, there is no tag for cpu_utilization in stackoverflow.
Does anyone know a scientific differentiation?
Very doubtful. You will probably find exact definitions in some academic text books but I bet they'll be inconsistent between text books. I've seen definitions in manpages that are inconsistent with the actual implementation within the code. This is a case where everyone assumes the definitions are so obvious they never check to see if theirs is consistent with others.
My suggestion is to fully definite your use and go with that. Others can then have a reference (your formula/algorithm) and can translate between yours and theirs.
By the way, figuring out utilization, usage, etc. is very complicated and fraught with traps. OSs move tasks around, logical CPUs move between cores, turbo modes temporarily bump clock rates, work is offloaded to internal coprocessors, processors go to sleep or drop in frequency, hyperthreading where multiple logical CPUs contend for shared resources, etc. What's worse is that it is a moving target. Exact and well-defined metrics today will start to get out of date quickly as hardware and software architectures continue to evolve per Moore's law and any SW equivalent.
Within a single context (paper, book, web article, etc.), there may be a difference, but there are not, as far as I know, consistent universally accepted standard definitions for these terms.
Within one authors writings, however, they might be used to describe different things. For example (not an exhaustive list):
How much of a single CPUs computing capacity is being used over a specific sample period
How much of a single CPUs computing capacity is being used by a specific schedulable entity (thread, process, light-weight process, kernel, interrupt routine, etc.) over a specific sample period
Either of the above, but taking all CPUs in the system into account
Any of the above, but with a difference in perspective between real CPUs and virtual CPUs (whether hyperthreading or CPUs actually being emulated by VMware, KVM/QEMU, Xen, Virtualbox or the like)
A comparative measure of how much CPU capacity is being used in one algorithm over another
Probably several other possibilities as well....
CPU usage as a percentage during the interval.
o VM - Amount of actively used virtual CPU, as a percentage of total available CPU. This is the host's view of the CPU usage, not the guest operating system view. It is the average CPU utilization over all available virtual CPUs in the virtual machine. For example, if a virtual machine with one virtual CPU is running on a host that has four physical CPUs and the CPU usage is 100%, the virtual machine is using one physical CPU completely.
virtual CPU usage = usagemhz / (# of virtual CPUs x core frequency)
o Host - Actively used CPU of the host, as a percentage of the total available CPU. Active CPU is approximately equal to the ratio of the used CPU to the available CPU.
available CPU = # of physical CPUs x clock rate
100% represents all CPUs on the host. For example, if a four-CPU host is running a virtual machine with two CPUs, and the usage is 50%, the host is using two CPUs completely.
o Cluster - Sum of actively used CPU of all virtual machines in the cluster, as a percentage of the total available CPU.
CPU Usage = CPU usagemhz / effectivecpu
CPU usage, as measured in megahertz, during the interval.
o VM - Amount of actively used virtual CPU. This is the host's view of the CPU usage, not the guest operating system view.
o Host - Sum of the actively used CPU of all powered on virtual machines on a host. The maximum possible value is the frequency of the processors multiplied by the number of processors. For example, if you have a host with four 2GHz CPUs running a virtual machine that is using 4000MHz, the host is using two CPUs completely.
4000 / (4 x 2000) = 0.50
Time accounted to the virtual machine. If a system service runs on behalf of this virtual machine, the time spent by that service (represented by cpu.system) should be charged to this virtual machine. If not, the time spent (represented by cpu.overlap) should not be charged against this virtual machine.

a guestOS process occupies VCPU at any given time?

Recently i`ve been studying something about hardware-supported virtualization.
I read about 3 states of host cpu ,thus the most common userspace,kernelspace and A New Guest State.And as i can see from the ps command,there is a process for the vm i started,and some 'sub'-threads for each cpu owned by the virtual machine.Also i noticed when the vm runs some io related program,some more threads will be created on the host,which i guess might be the responses of qemu for hardware emulation.
So here comes my question:For any certain time(time in guest state,not the other two),does a vcpu thread represent a guestOS process running(i mean 'occupy' and 'exclusively')?just the same as a physical cpu,for any given time in userspace,a user process is running on it.
This may sound a little stupid,I just want to figure it out for further research.
To make this question simple:
is the vcpu thread which runs on host machine associated with some guestOS process at any given time?
To further simplify it:
is it right when i say the guestOS processes are actually running on the host CPU directly and scheduled as ordinary host-processes?the difference between the two kinds of process being what we called virtualization?
Maybe i need another threads to solve some questions about guestOS process switching,but before that,hope you guys can help me with this one.
I posted this question on LQ and got the answer.
VCPU is not a thread in host. KVM allows guest to run directly on a physical CPU with a less privilege guest mode. A timer interrupt will cause CPU back from guest mode to host mode and return to KVM. Since KVM is scheduled in kernel mode, a guest should be also scheduled in the host as well.

CPU usage different?

I have a basic question.
If I run an executable file (Release, Visual Studio 2010) on two computers with the same CPU speed run two different Windows operating systems, eg. Windws7 vs XP, shall I expect to see different CPU usages when I measure it using the task manager? Is the CPU speed the only factor to measuring the CPU usage?
Different OS's? Yes.
Operating Systems are the go-between between the programs you run and the bare-metal they run on. As OS'es change and evolve the naturally and and remove features that consume resources--these are things that run in the background; or they could be changes to the manner in which the OS speaks to the hardware.
Also, the measurement of CPU usage is done by the OS. There isn't a tachometer on chips saying "running at 87% of redline", but rather that "tach" is constructed largely by the OS.
After better understanding your situation: I would suggest taking a look at the Performance Monitor (perfmon.exe) which ships with both XP and Win7, and gets you much finer-grain detail about processor usage levels. Another (very good) option would be to consider running a profiler on your application on both OSes and compare the results. It would likely be the best option to specifically benchmark your application on both OSes.
Even on the same OS you should expect to see different usages, because there are so many factors that determine CPU usage.
The percentage of CPU usage listed in the task manager is not a very good indication of much of anything, except to say that a program either is, or is not using CPU. That particular statistic is derived from task switching statistics, and task switching is very sensitive to basically every single thing that's going on in a computer, from network access to memory speed to CPU temperature.

Hardware requirements for a Virtual Server

We have decided to go with a virtualization solution for a few of our development servers. I have an idea of what the hardware specs would be like if we bought separate physical servers, but I have no idea how to consolidate that information into the specification for a generalized virtual server.
I know intuitively that the specs are not additive - I shouldn't just add up all the RAM requirements from each machine to get the RAM required for the virtual server. I can't really treat them as parallel systems either because no matter how good the virtualization software is, it can't abstract away two servers trying to peg the CPU at the same time.
So my question is - is there a standard method to estimating the hardware requirements for a virtualized system given hardware requirement estimations for the underlying virtual machines? Is there a +C constant for VMWare/MS Virtual Server overhead (and if so, what is C?)?
P.S. I promise to move this over to serverfault once it goes into beta (Promise kept)
Yes add 25% additional resources to manage the VM. So if I need 4 servers that are equal to single core 2 ghz machines with 2 gigs of ram I will need 10 ghz processing power plus 10 gigs of ram. This will allow all systems to redline and still be ok.
In the real world this will never happen though, all your servers will not always be running all the time. You can get a feel for usage by profiling your current servers and determine their exact requirements and then adding an additional 25% in resources.
Check out this software for profiling utilization http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA/Profiling+Memory+and+CPU+usage+with+YourKit
The requirements are in fact additive. You should add up the memory requirements for each VM, and the disk requirements, and have at least one processor core per VM. Then add on whatever you need for the host system.
VMs can share a CPU, to some extent, if you have really low performance requirements, but they cannot share disk space or memory.
Answers above are far too high, second (1 core per VM) is closer. You can either 1) plan ahead and probably over-purchase 2) add just-in-time. Do you have some reason that you must know well ahead (yearly budget? your chosen host platform doesn't cluster hosts, so you can't add later?)
Unless you have an incredible simple usage profile, it will be hard to predict before and you'll over purchase. The answer above (+25%) would be several times more than you need for an modern server virtualization software (VMware, Zen, etc) that manages resources smartly. It's accurate only for desktop products like VPC. I chose to rough it out on a napkin and profile my first environment (set of machines) on the host. I'm happy.
Examples of things that will confound your estimation
Disk space, Some systems (Lab
Manager) use only the difference in
space from the base template. 10
deployed machines with 10 GB drives
using about 10 GB (template) + 200MB.
Disk space: You'll then find you
don't like the deltas in specific
CPU / Memory: This is dev
shop - so you'll have erratic load.
Smart hosts don't reserve memory and CPU.
CPU / Memory: But then you'll
want to do perf testing, and want to
reserve CPU cycles (not all hosts can
do that)
We all virtualize for different reasons. Many of the guests
in our environment don't have much work. We want them there to see how something behaves with a cluster of 3 servers of type X. Or, we have a bundle of weird client desktops waiting around, being used one at time by a tester. They rarely consume many host resources.
So, if you are using something like that doesn't do delta disks, disk space might be somewhat calculable. If lab manager (delta disk), disk space is really hard to predict.
Memory and processor usage: You'll have to profile or over-purchase heavily. I have many more guest CPUs than host CPUS, and don't have perf problems - but that's because of the choppy usage in our QA environments.