Hi!
Increasing MTU on interfaces would allow to make use of jumbo frames which
should improve the performance. Here [1] you can find what configuration
options you have to change to use jumbo frames.
Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Elena
[1]
https://chruz.wordpress.com/2015/10/09/configuring-openstack-to-use-jumbo-frames-mtu-9000/
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Gustavo Randich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Scenario: Kilo / VXLAN / DVR
>
> Networking installation documentation mentions that when using tunneling
> protocols, ideally, we could use jumbo frames on the physical network, but
> then describes a "conservative" approach which is to decrease the MTU size
> of the guests' interfaces (i.e. to 1454), using DHCP.
>
> In my current installation, which is the 'conservative' one (guest
> MTU=1454, host MTU=1500) , I'm getting these approximate iperf rates:
>
>tenant network, guest to guest same host = 9.5 GB/sec
>tenant network, guest to guest different host = 1.4 GB/sec
>
>
> My questions are:
>
>- Should there be any performance gains if I opt for guest MTU = 1500,
> and physical/host MTU = 1550 / 1600 / 9000?
>
>- Which Neutron / ML2 plugin configuration parameters should I modify
> (in addition to changing physical interfaces' MTU), in order to specify an
> MTU greater than 1500 in the physical network that contains my tenant
> networks?
>
>- Anyone knows of a Neutron installation procedure or guide covering
> the jumbo frames approach?
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
