On Apr 16 20:58, Donnelly, John wrote: > > how did you invoke the iperf server instance? > > I run ssh sessions between end points : > > servers: > > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iPerf -S -d & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iPerf -S -d & > > clients : > > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.50.11 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.50.12 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.50.13 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.50.14 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.50.15 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.50.16 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.50.17 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.60.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.50.18 & > > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.60.11 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.60.12 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.60.13 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.60.14 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.60.15 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.60.16 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.60.17 & > ssh -f -l root 10.10.50.2 iperf -f M -t 61 -c 100.100.60.18 & > > The Linux 5.4 machines have multiple ip addesses on a single adapter > server 1 <10.10.50.2> server 2 < 10.10.60.2 > > ifcfg_eth1:1 100.100.50.11 100.100.60.11 > :2 100.100.50.12 100.100.60.12 > :3 > <n ports> <n ports>
Hi John, I'm trying to understand your goal here - is there a specific use case, are you attempting to validate iperf functionality, or something else entirely? Not poking, I just can't see the benefit of the test scenario you've described. Since all of the interfaces are essentially the same, why not just invoke the client with a specific number of threads, e.g. -P 8? > >> or non-C++ Linux version available ? > > > Frankly, I am confused by this question... > > A non C++ (non-threaded) version. Ah, mmkay. You have a couple of options: 1) recompile w/out threading support (./configure --disable-threads) 2) invoke iperf with a single thread (-P 1); default is to run threaded if support is compiled in. So, in your test scenario (if truly needed), you could run mulitple server instances, each with a single thread and each on their own port. I suspect what you're seeing is actually a clash between the multiple client instances you've spawned (vs. invoking with a specific number of threads), but that's just a guess. I will note that I can get the server to report different finish times if I invoke multiple successive clients with some time in between each: [ 11] 0.0-61.1 sec 280 MBytes 4.57 MBytes/sec [ 4] 0.0-66.9 sec 221 MBytes 3.30 MBytes/sec [ 5] 0.0-73.2 sec 201 MBytes 2.74 MBytes/sec [ 6] 0.0-101.3 sec 435 MBytes 4.29 MBytes/sec [SUM] 0.0-101.3 sec 1136 MBytes 11.2 MBytes/sec ...but again, invoking in that way seems to be unnecessary. For giggles, try running your client against a _single_ server address with multiple client threads, and see what you get. Cheers, -tt -- Tom Throckmorton MCNC - Advanced Services Development 3021 Cornwallis Road Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 919.248.1448 "Connecting North Carolina's future today" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Iperf-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iperf-users
