Högskolan i Skövde

his.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • apa-cv
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Prestandajämförelse mellan Windows Server container och Hyper-V: I vilken grad förloras resurser när ett system partitioneras med dessa?
University of Skövde, School of Informatics.
2018 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 15 credits / 22,5 HE creditsStudent thesisAlternative title
Performance comparison between Windows Server container and Hyper-V : In what degree are resources lost when a system is partitioned with these? (English)
Abstract [sv]

Det här arbetet hade målet att undersöka vilken storlek förlusten av resurser som Hyper-V och Windows Server container introducerar när ett system delas upp med dessa.

Genom att testa detta skulle man också kunna jämföra Microsofts implementering av containerbaserad virtualisering med Linux implementering och se om det finns några likheter. För att kunna jämföra med tidigare forskning fanns målet att försöka efterlikna metoden i tidigare forskning som gjort liknande tester i operativsystemet Linux med KVM och LXC så nära som möjligt.

Resultaten visades sig till stor del överensstämma med resultaten på tester genomförda i Linux. Det vill säga att container-baserad virtualisering har överlag en mindre förlust av resurser än hypervisor-baserad virtualisering. Undantaget var dock nätverkstesterna där container-baserad virtualisering presterade sämst men även detta överensstämde med tidigare forskning.

Abstract [en]

This work had the goal of looking at the loss of resources that Hyper-V and Windows Server container introduce when a system is partitioned with these.

By testing this, you could also compare Microsoft's implementation of container-based virtualization with Linux implementation and see if there are any similarities. To be able to compare with previous research, the goal was to try to mimic the method in previous research that made similar tests in the Linux operating system with KVM and LXC as close as possible.

The results were largely consistent with the results of tests conducted in Linux. That is, container-based virtualization generally has a smaller loss of resources than hypervisor-based virtualization. The exception was, however, the network tests where container-based virtualization performed poorest, but this also was consistent with previous research.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. , p. 25
Keywords [en]
Virtualization, containers, hypervisor, Windows Server container, Hyper-V
Keywords [sv]
Virtualisering, containers, hypervisor, Windows Server container, Hyper-V
National Category
Computer and Information Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:his:diva-15747OAI: oai:DiVA.org:his-15747DiVA, id: diva2:1221724
Subject / course
Informationsteknologi
Educational program
Network and Systems Administration
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2018-06-21 Created: 2018-06-20 Last updated: 2018-06-21Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(838 kB)174 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 838 kBChecksum SHA-512
885318423a0e9e06bf562da6d2809ff0eecf855897833c63c8251e9e7fe044942507ecc645b6fe8a1141ac20ce11de8de7b042f9b799d355591b37e56600e058
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
School of Informatics
Computer and Information Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 174 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 1014 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • apa-cv
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf