Hi,
On Aug 3, 2009, at 12:53 PM, Invernizzi Fabrizio wrote:
Hi
-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Lambrev [mailto:stefan.lamb...@moneybookers.com]
Sent: lunedì 3 agosto 2009 11.22
To: Invernizzi Fabrizio
Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Test on 10GBE Intel based network card
Hi,
The limitation that you see is about the max number of packets that
FreeBSD can handle - it looks like your best performance is reached
at
64 byte packets?
If you are meaning in term of Packet per second, you are right.
These are the packet per second measured during tests:
64 byte: 610119 Pps
512 byte: 516917 Pps
1492 byte: 464962 Pps
Am I correct that the maximum you can reach is around 639,000 packets
per second?
Yes, as you can see the maximum is 610119 Pps.
Where does this limit come from?
I duno - the tests I did before were with SYN packets (random source)
which was my worst scenario,
and the server CPU were busy generating MD5 check sums for
"syncache" (around 35% of the time).
If I have to compare my results with your, you beat me with factor
2.5, may be because you use ICMP for the test
and your processor is better then my test stations :)
Also my experience is only with gigabit cards (em driver) and FreeBSD
7.something_before_1 where the em thread was eating 100% cpu.
If you are lucky LOCK_PROFILING(9) will help you to see where the CPUs
spend their time, if not you will see kernel panic :)
Once problematic locks identified they can be reworked, but I think
the first part is already done
and work on the second already started.
In my experience increasing hw.em.rxd and hw.em.txd yelled better
results, but I think ixgb already comes tuned by default
as it still doesn't have to support such a large number of different
cards.
Also at the time of my tests there were not support for multi queues
in the OS even if they were supported by the HW, which is changed in
7.2 (?)
Also you are not routing the traffic, but instead the server handles
the requests itself and eat CPU to reply?
Correct. In these first tests I want to "tune" the system, so I am
using the (let me say) worst scenario.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-
unsubscr...@freebsd.org
"
--
Best Wishes,
Stefan Lambrev
ICQ# 24134177
Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente
alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione
derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente
vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete
cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e
di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.
This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain
privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.
Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is
unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete
this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-
mail, Thanks.
--
Best Wishes,
Stefan Lambrev
ICQ# 24134177
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
