Dear Steve,
My next "router" appliance will be:
http://www.axiomtek.com.tw/products/ViewProduct.asp?view=429
This is exactly the device that I have been testing with (just rebranded).
cool.
what performace do you reach?
After some very quick testing with everything default, I am witnessing
results that are far below what I would have expected. I have a few
questions:
- how do I identify if polling on an interface is enabled? I see no
difference with ifconfig output
em0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
options=5b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,POLLING> <---
ether 00:90:0b:08:d7:90
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX <full-duplex>)
status: active
kern.polling.reg_frac=20
kern.polling.user_frac=20
kern.polling.burst_max=512
man polling
polling does not help to get more pps, but prevent locks and preserve some
%cpu for other tasks (routing daemons,..)
- do I need to compile a new kernel to be able to enable/disable polling?
options DEVICE_POLLING
you need this in kern-conf.
- without moving some hardware around, I only have a single box connected to
a router, and I've been testing from that box to a different interface within
the router. Will the test results be optimal if I ping all the way through
the router to a second device connected to it?
use any other packet generator.
linux has one in kernel, and there are moch more.
(iperf,...)
ping uses a lot of cpu.
- how are the results affected when generating and receiving the test packets
within the router itself (as opposed to using outside devices)?
thats no real "pps" forwarding performance over the network cards.
Kind regards,
Ingo Flaschberger
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
