Expensive or not it's far from 50% packet loss.

I know that one can see everything that's processing packets as
expensive, but at the end of a day, that is why we use pf_ring, not to
capture packets with 0% loss at 10Gbit and send them to > /dev/null
(and that's how I see most pure pf_ring benchmarks are done).


Your hardware seems to be very old and lacking all of the important
performance optimisations - E5405 is not something one would typically
use.


300-400Mbit per second is not a problem with pf_ring and Bro, I have
1-2Gbit and 0% loss (pf_ring without ZC) up to 4-5Gbit/sec (but with a
different technology than pf_ring).

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi
> in our test we’ve seend that packet processing in Bro is very expensive, I
> do not think you can improve significantly tuning the pf_ring side.
>
> Alfredo
>
> On 11 Sep 2015, at 20:52, nathanael rayborn <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> I'm experiencing high packet loss (15% -50%) with Bro 2.4 compiled with
> PF_Ring. PFcount (pfcount -i eth0 -e 1) shows 0% packet loss while
> /proc/net/pf_ring/PID shows the same number of dropped packets as broctl
> netstats. The github link contains all changes and performance steps I've
> taken so far along with output from PFcount, broctl, and ethtool. Has anyone
> else experienced similar performance issues or have recommendations to get
> my dropped packets as close to 0% as possible? Thanks
>
> Current config - https://gist.github.com/nate-ray/8b4d03eab49d11715398
> _______________________________________________
> Ntop-misc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ntop-misc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
_______________________________________________
Ntop-misc mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc

Reply via email to