On 02/26/2013 04:26 PM, Jon Schipp wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:39 AM, Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> wrote:
On 02/26/2013 05:39 AM, Jon Schipp wrote:
netsniff-ng did _much_ better as the RX ring buffer size increased.
Trafgen generated packets roughly at 70,000/sec and hit 150,000/sec
here and there.
On what packet size, what hardware? Gigabit Eth. or 10Gigabit/s Eth.?
Packet Size:
http://fossies.org/linux/misc/netsniff-ng-0.5.7.tar.gz:a/netsniff-ng-0.5.7/src/examples/trafgen/nst_udp_pkt_1472.txf
Two Gigabit Ethernet cards, linked directly. Don't know the hardware
off the top of my head, have to look.
At leat on Gigabit Ethernet I can generate almost linerate with
trafgen, in other words same speed as pktgen in the kernel, e.g.
~1,35Mio pps on 64 Byte pps, or 80k pps for 1500 Byte pps, etc.
Well, I was getting close to 80k, stayed above 70k, seen 77k a lot
with ifpps. I didn't do a small packet test though.
Sounds about right. ;-)
Your measurements do not show that and I find this a bit confusing,
also you do not show std. deviation, how many runs you did, etc.
I did 3 each but did not write them all down because netsniff-ng
dropped less packets than daemonlogger for every test.
I was presuming a quick test for the mailing list, did it right before
bed, I can do a more thorough post later.
I believe that this is satisfactory to show that netsniff-ng performed
better, or at the least, on my system.
Thanks for doing this! Appreciate it!
I wasn't concerned with trafgen performance and didn't tune anything.
Default installation of Ubuntu Server.
Ok, no problem.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"netsniff-ng" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
