skip to main content
10.1145/3409334.3452040acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesacm-seConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Characterizing networking performance and interrupt overhead of container overlay networks

Published:10 May 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Containers, an emerging service to manage and deploy applications into isolated boxes, are quickly increasing in popularity in the cloud and edge computing. In order to provide connectivity among multiple hosts, cloud providers adopt overlay networks, which not only impose significant overhead in throughput and latency in containerized applications, but also consume more CPU resources of the system. Through profiling and code analysis, this paper reveals that the overwhelming interrupts, as well as its load imbalance in the kernel processing contribute to the inefficiency of the container overlay networks. Specifically, every packet in container networks might raise multiple software interrupts compared to that in VM networks. Our results indicate that the container network throughput drops 2/3 and the tail latency increases more than 37 times if the interrupt overhead is not well optimized.

References

  1. [n.d.]. 4 Container Usage Takeaways from the 2019 Sysdig Report. https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/11/08/4-container-usage-takeaways-from-the-2019-sysdig-report/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. [n.d.]. Amazon Elastic Container Service. https://aws.amazon.com/ecs/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. [n.d.]. Apache Mesos. https://mesos.apache.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. [n.d.]. Azure Container Service. https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/container-service/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. [n.d.]. Cloudsuite. https://cloudsuite.ch.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. [n.d.]. Docker Swarm. https://docs.docker.com/engine/swarm/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. [n.d.]. Everything at Google Runs in Containers. https://www.infoq.com/news/2014/06/everything-google-containers/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. [n.d.]. Flame Graph. https://github.com/brendangregg/FlameGraph.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. [n.d.]. Google Cloud Container. https://cloud.google.com/containers/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. [n.d.]. iPerf. https://iperf.fr/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. [n.d.]. Irqbalance. https://github.com/Irqbalance/irqbalance.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. [n.d.]. Kubernetes. https://kubernetes.io/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. [n.d.]. Memcached. https://memcached.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. [n.d.]. Netperf. http://www.netperf.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. [n.d.]. Sockperf. https://github.com/Mellanox/sockperf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. B. Burns and D. Oppenheimer. 2016. Design Patterns For Container-based Distributed Systems. In Proceedings of USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing (HotCloud). Denver, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. W. Felter, A. Ferreira, R. Rajamony, and J. Rubio. 2015. An Updated Performance Comparison of Virtual Machines and Linux Containers. In Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software (ISPASS). Philadelphia, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. S. Han, S. Marshall, B. Chun, and S. Ratnasamy. 2012. MegaPipe: A New Programming Interface for Scalable Network I/O. In Proceedings of the 10th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI). Hollywood, CA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. E. Jeong, S. Woo, M. Jamshed, H. Jeong, S. Ihm, D. Han, and K. Park. 2014. mTCP: a Highly Scalable User-level TCP Stack for Multicore Systems.. In Proceedings of USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI). Seattle, WA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. J. Khalid, E. Rozner, W. Felter, C. Xu, K. Rajamani, A. Ferreira, and A. Akella. 2018. Iron: Isolating Network-based CPU in Container Environments. In Proceedings of USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI). Renton, WA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. D. Merkel. 2014. Docker: Lightweight Linux Containers for Consistent Development and Deployment. In Linux Journal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. A. Panda, M. Sagiv, and S. Shenker. 2017. Verification in the Age of Microservices. In Proceedings of USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems (HotOS). Vancouver, Canada.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. S. Peter, J. Li, I. Zhang, D. Ports, D. Woos, A. Krishnamurthy, T. Anderson, and T. Roscoe. 2014. Arrakis: the Operating System Is The Control Plane. In Proceedings of USENIX Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation (OSDI). Broomfield, CO, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. P. Sharma, L. Chaufournier, P. Shenoy, and Y. Tay. 2016. Containers and Virtual Machines at Scale: A Comparative Study. In Proceedings of ACM/IFIP Middleware conference (Middleware). Trento, Italy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. K. Suo, J. Rao, L. Cheng, and F. C. M. Lau. 2016. Time Capsule: Tracing Packet Latency across Different Layers in Virtualized Systems. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGOPS Asia-Pacific Workshop on Systems (APSys). Hong Kong, China.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. K. Suo, J. Rao, H. Jiang, and W. Srisa-an. 2018. Characterizing and Optimizing Hotspot Parallel Garbage Collection On Multicore Systems. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys). Porto, Portugal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. K. Suo, Y. Zhao, W. Chen, and J. Rao. 2018. An Analysis and Empirical Study of Container Networks. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM). Honolulu, HI, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. K. Suo, Y. Zhao, W. Chen, and J. Rao. 2018. vNetTracer: Efficient and Programmable Packet Tracing in Virtualized Networks. In Proceedings of International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS). Vienna, Austria.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. K. Suo, Y. Zhao, J. Rao, L. Cheng, X. Zhou, and F. Lau. 2017. Preserving I/O Prioritization in Virtualized OSes. In Proceedings of the 2017 Symposium on Cloud Computing (SoCC). Santa Clara, California, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. T. Yu, S. Noghabi, S. Raindel, H. Liu, J. Padhye, and V. Sekar. 2016. FreeFlow: High Performance Container Networking. In Proceedings of ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNet). Atlanta, GA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. D. Zhuo, K. Zhang, Y. Zhu, H. Liu, M. Rockett, A. Krishnamurthy, and T. Anderson. 2019. Slim: OS Kernel Support for a Low-Overhead Container Overlay Network. In Proceedings of USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI). Boston, MA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Characterizing networking performance and interrupt overhead of container overlay networks

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          ACM SE '21: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Southeast Conference
          April 2021
          263 pages
          ISBN:9781450380683
          DOI:10.1145/3409334
          • Conference Chair:
          • Kazi Rahman,
          • Program Chair:
          • Eric Gamess

          Copyright © 2021 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 10 May 2021

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate178of377submissions,47%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader