Hello! > There isn't any sort of clever short-circuiting in loopback is there?
No, from all that I know. > I > do like the convenience of testing things over loopback, but always fret > about not including drivers and actual hardware interrupts etc. Well, if the test is right, it should show cost of redundant ACKs. > Regardless, kudos for running the test. The only thing missing is the > -c and -C options to enable the CPU utilization measurements which will > then give the service demand on a CPU time per transaction basis. Or > was this a UP system that was taken to CPU saturation? It is my notebook. :-) Of course, cpu consumption is 100%. (Actally, netperf shows 100.10 :-)) I will redo test on a real network. What range of -b should I test? > What i'm thinking about isn't so much about the latency I understand. Actually, I did those tests ages ago for a pure throughput case, when nothing goes in the opposite direction. I did not find a difference that time. And nobody even noticed that Linux sends ACKs _each_ small segment for unidirectional connections for all those years. :-) Alexey - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
