Re: tcp bw in 2.6

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Bill Fink
Date: Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - 12:19 am

Tangential aside:

On Tue, 02 Oct 2007, Rick Jones wrote:


Interesting.  I was going to say that I've generally had the opposite
experience when it comes to bulk data transfers, which is what I would
expect due to CPU caching effects, but that perhaps it's motherboard/NIC/
driver dependent.  But in testing I just did I discovered it's even
MTU dependent (most of my normal testing is always with 9000-byte
jumbo frames).

With Myricom 10-GigE NICs, NIC interrupts on CPU 0 and nuttcp app
running on CPU 1 (both transmit and receive sides), and using 9000-byte
jumbo frames:

[root@lang2 ~]# nuttcp -w10m 192.168.88.16
10078.5000 MB /  10.02 sec = 8437.5396 Mbps 100 %TX 99 %RX

With Myricom 10-GigE NICs, and both NIC interrupts and nuttcp app
on CPU 0 (both transmit and receive sides), again using 9000-byte
jumbo frames:

[root@lang2 ~]# nuttcp -w10m 192.168.88.16
11817.8750 MB /  10.00 sec = 9909.7537 Mbps 100 %TX 74 %RX

Same tests repeated with standard 1500-byte Ethernet MTU:

With Myricom 10-GigE NICs, NIC interrupts on CPU 0 and nuttcp app
running on CPU 1 (both transmit and receive sides), and using
standard 1500-byte Ethernet MTU:

[root@lang2 ~]# nuttcp -M1460 -w10m 192.168.88.16
 5685.9375 MB /  10.00 sec = 4768.0951 Mbps 99 %TX 98 %RX

With Myricom 10-GigE NICs, and both NIC interrupts and nuttcp app
on CPU 0 (both transmit and receive sides), again using standard
1500-byte Ethernet MTU:

[root@lang2 ~]# nuttcp -M1460 -w10m 192.168.88.16
 4974.0625 MB /  10.03 sec = 4161.6015 Mbps 100 %TX 100 %RX

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.  :-)

						-Bill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Mon Oct 1, 5:59 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Linus Torvalds, (Mon Oct 1, 7:14 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Mon Oct 1, 7:20 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, David Miller, (Mon Oct 1, 8:50 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Mon Oct 1, 9:23 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Herbert Xu, (Tue Oct 2, 3:52 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, John Heffner, (Tue Oct 2, 8:06 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 8:09 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 8:41 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 9:25 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 2, 9:34 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Stephen Hemminger, (Tue Oct 2, 9:47 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Ben Greear, (Tue Oct 2, 9:48 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 9:48 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 9:49 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Stephen Hemminger, (Tue Oct 2, 10:10 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 10:11 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Rick Jones, (Tue Oct 2, 10:14 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Ben Greear, (Tue Oct 2, 10:18 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 10:20 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 10:21 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Stephen Hemminger, (Tue Oct 2, 10:54 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Rick Jones, (Tue Oct 2, 11:01 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, John Heffner, (Tue Oct 2, 11:29 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 11:35 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 11:40 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 12:07 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 2, 12:27 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 2, 12:29 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 12:33 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Rick Jones, (Tue Oct 2, 12:47 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Rick Jones, (Tue Oct 2, 12:53 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, John Heffner, (Tue Oct 2, 12:53 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 1:14 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, David Miller, (Tue Oct 2, 1:31 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, David Miller, (Tue Oct 2, 1:33 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Rick Jones, (Tue Oct 2, 1:40 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Wayne Scott, (Tue Oct 2, 1:42 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Roland Dreier, (Tue Oct 2, 1:44 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, David Miller, (Tue Oct 2, 2:16 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 2:21 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 2:26 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, David Miller, (Tue Oct 2, 2:32 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, David Miller, (Tue Oct 2, 2:47 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 2, 2:56 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Rick Jones, (Tue Oct 2, 3:17 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, David Miller, (Tue Oct 2, 3:32 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Tue Oct 2, 3:36 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Rick Jones, (Tue Oct 2, 3:59 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Bill Fink, (Wed Oct 3, 12:19 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, David Miller, (Wed Oct 3, 1:02 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Pekka Pietikainen, (Wed Oct 3, 2:13 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Larry McVoy, (Wed Oct 3, 2:23 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Pekka Pietikainen, (Wed Oct 3, 2:50 pm)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Daniel Schaffrath, (Mon Oct 15, 5:40 am)
Re: tcp bw in 2.6, Stephen Hemminger, (Mon Oct 15, 8:49 am)