In today’s topic, I’d like to talk about the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities. But not about the harm they cause, this has been covered widely in numerous articles, but how Microsoft patches intended to protect you from the vulnerabilities, affect (if they do) the hardware performance. Before we take a deep dive into the tests and numbers, let me tell a few words about Meltdown and Spectre and outline the testing scope to make sure we speak one language.
Performance or protection? How Microsoft patches against Meltdown and Spectre influence CPU, RAM and Disks performance
In the previous parts, I’ve shown you the process of configuring NFS and iSCSI protocols between our servers. So now, we’ve got everything ready for running our performance tests and finally finding out which network protocol is faster as a storage for virtual machines on VMware ESXi: NFS or iSCSI.
So to benchmark the iSCSI performance, I’ve created the StarWind device on the server and connected it to the ESXi host over the iSCSI protocol. As to OS for running further tests, I’ve used Windows Server 2016.
Subscribe to our posts
- How is NVMe-oF doing? Part 1: Linux NVMe-oF Initiator + Linux SPDK NVMe-oF Target
- Setting up a Windows Failover Cluster for a home lab
- Performance comparison: SQL Server Failover Cluster Instance on S2D vs. SQL Server Basic Availability Groups on Storage Spaces. The battle starts
- Can SQL Server Failover Cluster Instances run on S2D twice as fast as SQL Server Basic Availability Groups on Storage Spaces? Part 2: Studying FCI performance
- Can SQL Server Failover Cluster Instance run on S2D twice as fast as SQL Server Basic Availability Groups on Storage Spaces? Part 1: Studying BAG performance