From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 9 10:41:06 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAEF616A4CE; Sun, 9 Jan 2005 10:41:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mx2.mail.ru (mx2.mail.ru [194.67.23.122]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3561A43D4C; Sun, 9 Jan 2005 10:41:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from hydros@mail.ru) Received: from [217.118.66.254] (port=19878 helo=turtle) by mx2.mail.ru with esmtp id 1CnaVL-000578-00; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 13:41:04 +0300 Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 13:40:50 +0300 From: hydros X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.0) Professional X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1116933942.20050109134050@mail.ru> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam: Not detected X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 19:58:59 +0000 cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: pppoe perfomance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: hydros List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:41:06 -0000 Hi all. Does anyone tested a perfomance of pppoe+freebsd as server? How much cpu\ram does it east with a different vpn load. I`m trying to make a server and not sure does the hardware would be able to serve my LAN users server pII-450 ram 256mb hdd 10gb NIC realtek rl0 10\100mbit(working at 10mbit speed) -- Best regards, hydros mailto:hydros@mail.ru From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 11 22:15:50 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F359F16A4CE for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from avscan2.sentex.ca (avscan2.sentex.ca [199.212.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE4043D41 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from localhost (localhost.sentex.ca [127.0.0.1]) by avscan2.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0BMFnAA063224 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:15:49 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from avscan2.sentex.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (avscan2.sentex.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 62738-07 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:15:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by avscan2.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0BMFnJ2063206 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:15:49 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from simian.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0BMFfiW013097 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:15:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.0.20050111170523.07c60600@64.7.153.2> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:17:07 -0500 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Mike Tancsa Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at avscan2b Subject: NFS and SAMBA on RELENG_5 vs RELENG_4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:50 -0000 Has anyone looked at the performance of a UP* system on RELENG_4 vs RELENG_5 as an NFS and SAMBA server ? I need to deploy such a box and was wondering if someone has run through this exercise recently** ? I know quite often when the ugly asterisk laden word "benchmark" comes up the rush of groans is deafening. But if you dont use benchmarking programs as _part_ of the evaluation process, how do you determine what will perform best for you ? ---Mike *Its not of interest to me if SMP makes a difference. The hardware is UP. **I found some discussions from Oct / Nov of 2004, but that was related more to a bug in the em driver affecting RELENG_5 network performance -------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 Sentex Communications, mike@sentex.net Providing Internet since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada www.sentex.net/mike From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 12 16:11:21 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53D716A4CE for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:11:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from otter3.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32BE43D1D for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:11:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by otter3.centtech.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id j0CGBIOJ069060; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:11:18 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <41E54C20.9060101@centtech.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:11:12 -0600 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041110 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Tancsa References: <6.2.0.14.0.20050111170523.07c60600@64.7.153.2> In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.0.20050111170523.07c60600@64.7.153.2> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS and SAMBA on RELENG_5 vs RELENG_4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:11:21 -0000 Mike Tancsa wrote: > > Has anyone looked at the performance of a UP* system on RELENG_4 vs > RELENG_5 as an NFS and SAMBA server ? I need to deploy such a box and > was wondering if someone has run through this exercise recently** ? > > I know quite often when the ugly asterisk laden word "benchmark" comes > up the rush of groans is deafening. But if you dont use benchmarking > programs as _part_ of the evaluation process, how do you determine what > will perform best for you ? We have a handful of FreeBSD NFS/Samba servers that are heavily used (mostly NFS). I have not directly compared 4.x versus 5.x with any tools, but I can tell you that a UP P4 box with 5.x is fast enough to support 500 P4's (linux) over NFS, with some tweaking. I've started making all my FreeBSD NFS servers 5.x. I'm doing some tests today with iozone+FreeBSD 5.3+RAID5/50/10+local/NFS, so if others are interested, I can post the information up somewhere when I am done. Keep in mind it's for in house information only, so I won't be taking performance testing requests.. :) Mike - let me know if you want any tweaks that I've done for anything specific. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology I have seen the future and it is just like the present, only longer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 12 16:33:39 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C5FE16A4CE for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:33:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from avscan2.sentex.ca (avscan2.sentex.ca [199.212.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 380E543D48 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:33:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from localhost (localhost.sentex.ca [127.0.0.1]) by avscan2.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0CGXcZS012742; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:33:38 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from avscan2.sentex.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (avscan2.sentex.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 11825-10; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:33:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by avscan2.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0CGXbMD012691; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:33:38 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from simian.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0CGXVKC016010; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:33:31 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.0.20050112113257.07ca0c08@64.7.153.2> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:35:02 -0500 To: Eric Anderson From: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: <41E54C20.9060101@centtech.com> References: <6.2.0.14.0.20050111170523.07c60600@64.7.153.2> <41E54C20.9060101@centtech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at avscan2b cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS and SAMBA on RELENG_5 vs RELENG_4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:33:39 -0000 At 11:11 AM 12/01/2005, Eric Anderson wrote: >Mike - let me know if you want any tweaks that I've done for anything >specific. Hi, Yes, by all means please post any suggestions you have. I am going to take the time and try and test a bit with a half dozen client machines on both RELENG_4 and RELENG_5 to see what differences there are. If you can suggest some benchmark tools / methods that would be great. ---Mike From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 13 09:05:05 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9161016A4CE; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:05:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from as.itesm.mx (as.itesm.mx [200.34.200.251]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C464443D31; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:05:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ccardena@itesm.mx) X-Ironport-AV: i="3.88,119,1102312800"; d="scan'208"; a="45508937:sNHT13680588" Received: from [137.194.164.215] by itesm.mx with HTTP; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:05:02 -0600 Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:05:02 +0100 Message-ID: <41E11BD300003B8D@mailserver3.itesm.mx> From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?C=E9sar=20C=E1rdenas?= To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org Subject: File System Full Error X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: ccardena@itesm.mx List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:05:05 -0000 Dear all, Apologize if I am not posting on the correct forum, I am a very new FReeB= SD user...I'm using FreeBSD 4.5 Release P20 I have a problem concerning "file system full"... Results from "df" command are: ****************************** Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a 99183 51233 40016 56% / /dev/ad0s1f 4379991 1317599 2711993 33% /usr /dev/ad0s1e 19815 19788 -1558 109% /var procfs 4 4 0 100% /proc ****************************** To my understanding memory device "ad0s1e" should be 50Mo for better perf= ormance...Which file I must change for correcting the problem marked in device "ad0s1e" and which command? I guess after changing such a file I must restart computer, is there any command for doing that because I am remotly accessing this machine? Thanks for any advice, have a nice day, C=E9sar C=E1rdenas (ccardena@itesm.mx) Electronics and Computer Science Department Monterrey Tech, Quer=E9taro Campus http://www.qro.itesm.mx Personal Phone: +(33) 625249469 Office Phone: +(33) 145817146 Office Fax: +(33) 145817158 All phones and fax from abroad France The content of this data transmission is not considered as an offer, prop= osal, understanding, or agreement unless it is confirmed in a document signed by a legal representative of ITESM. The content of this data transmission= is confidential and it is intended to be delivered only to the addresses,= therefore, it shall not be distributed and/or disclosed through any mean without the original sender's previous authorization. If you are not the addressee you are forbidden to use it, either totally or partially, for any purpose. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 14 09:57:45 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3A3D16A4CE for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:57:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from eagle.ericsson.se (eagle.ericsson.se [193.180.251.53]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C6643D41 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:57:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from eddie.oleary@ericsson.com) Received: from esealmw140.al.sw.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.121]) j0E9vhO6001557 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:57:43 +0100 Received: from esealnt613.al.sw.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.125]) by esealmw140.al.sw.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:57:43 +0100 Received: from ESEALNT747.al.sw.ericsson.se ([153.88.251.7]) by esealnt613.al.sw.ericsson.se with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2657.72) id ZAPFMWCH; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:57:43 +0100 Received: by ESEALNT747.al.sw.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:57:43 +0100 Message-ID: X-Sybari-Trust: f3823f2e 8bd604a9 b4630302 00000138 From: "Eddie Oleary (BH/LMI)" To: "'freebsd-performance@freebsd.org'" Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:59:57 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jan 2005 09:57:43.0409 (UTC) FILETIME=[7DC32E10:01C4FA1F] Subject: Tool for testing Concurrent TCP Streams X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:57:45 -0000 A Chairde, Can anybody point me to a tool that will allow me to generate 15,000 + concurrent TCP streams as I want to test a system , and see how many concurrent streams the client can handle before stopping. Slan / Ed From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 14 11:14:16 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 455AC16A4CE for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:14:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.207]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA1F43D41 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:14:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vladgalu@gmail.com) Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id r35so327737rna for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:14:15 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=EqzT4Ovd5DvZt4IrYS4myT51J+12oapOlIPtiudFjyPJrerzD+MmDxFZ3r1jaxl3b23OXM7VhflDiX6wyoUr4SMuXwe0MLNQrHBdUcnwXNArCJsx+ApHMBHMHZcKF5+PjzKDhf+oeeywVFG/FGkuCUB63m2+Ch0NUgjtsYJAlgs= Received: by 10.38.161.11 with SMTP id j11mr80506rne; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:14:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.38.149.29 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:14:15 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <79722fad0501140314482620dd@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:14:15 +0000 From: Vlad GALU To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: Subject: Re: Tool for testing Concurrent TCP Streams X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Vlad GALU List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:14:16 -0000 On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:59:57 +0100, Eddie Oleary (BH/LMI) wrote: > A Chairde, > > Can anybody point me to a tool that will allow me to generate 15,000 + concurrent TCP streams as I want to test a system , and see how many concurrent streams > the client can handle before stopping. It will usually handle no more than min(max server descriptors, max client descriptors). In terms of performance, I don't know if 'to handle' is a correctly chosen word. It depends heavily on whatever I/O notification mechanism it uses, on both sides. The client/server connection won't 'stop' at all, it's just that you won't be able to open another paralel connection towards the server at some point. > > Slan / Ed > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 15 00:53:41 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 286B416A4CE for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:53:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp815.mail.sc5.yahoo.com (smtp815.mail.sc5.yahoo.com [66.163.170.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E9A6543D31 for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:53:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jin@george.lbl.gov) Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.10?) (jinmtb@sbcglobal.net@68.127.148.172 with plain) by smtp815.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Jan 2005 00:53:40 -0000 Message-ID: <41E869CD.8010001@george.lbl.gov> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 16:54:37 -0800 From: "Jin Guojun [VFFS]" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040912 X-Accept-Language: zh, zh-CN, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Eddie Oleary (BH/LMI)" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: "'freebsd-performance@freebsd.org'" Subject: Re: Tool for testing Concurrent TCP Streams X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:53:41 -0000 Eddie Oleary (BH/LMI) wrote: >A Chairde, > > > Can anybody point me to a tool that will allow me to generate 15,000 + concurrent TCP streams as I want to test a system , and see how many concurrent streams >the client can handle before stopping. > > iperf is a such tool, but limitation may occur at No. of file descriptors, sockets, and/or threads, which is most likely the bottleneck. -- ------------ Jin Guojun ----------- v --- jin@george.lbl.gov --- Distributed Systems Department http://www.dsd.lbl.gov/~jin Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720