From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 10 07:24:30 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26A8D106566C; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 07:24:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mostafafaridi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com (mail-bw0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 782D28FC0A; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 07:24:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz12 with SMTP id 12so11521599bwz.13 for ; Sun, 09 Jan 2011 23:24:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type; bh=k6U0MPuyWE3DKVKAyY8gvjn67ZJInjaXG31jTFm4JZ8=; b=w7GGrdXOb3si6gh/ljqo8BvheZWcGjs5TEVgeBALK/dU5FaGj6djmGWkENroVId5kq 6KwPYvYZJRpbHwFFwwbjjeDtA/61H/q7FHIvM8lXZoOxVpDfSRt3IHeairEL3jaGfHQF fxHPeqGNKTM4DDBvduYTksRikMNquuHS0cUD4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type; b=XesWNYXC3P+Sf5zmnwIRmglPFb+Js8uXgF5XrcMKyqsEt18cmODqN5jT1Mkq/L+y/E y6GbZyvTD0EqH5nN5NXaZKRjee2JyQG7DNRZWAhU/mJBHBXDVXVinAXo9SK5/Z55f/Ch E0FPUpVGBBMYF0bedtNzo0zcJvVBWz7OTs5rI= Received: by 10.204.123.5 with SMTP id n5mr3988704bkr.58.1294642500540; Sun, 09 Jan 2011 22:55:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mfaridipc.faridi ([80.191.91.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f20sm13038187bkf.16.2011.01.09.22.54.58 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 09 Jan 2011 22:54:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4D2AAC00.1010408@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:19:36 +0330 From: Gholam Mostafa Faridi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101213 Thunderbird/3.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: connect to VPN server with l2tp X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 07:24:30 -0000 I use FreeBSD AMD64 with Gnome , my friend manage VPN on FreeBSD box and it use L2tp method. So my friend say when I want use it , I must use it with l2tp method or way , I search google and I see I can use l2tp for connect to VPN or MPD. So for connect to server what I must do ? Do I need I run IPSEC on my system or no ? Do I need config l2tp ? my friend only give me username and password and IP of server and say I can use these for connect server From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 10 12:49:22 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C33D106566B for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 12:49:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432FC8FC16 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 12:49:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PcHBZ-0001ca-29 for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:49:21 +0100 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:49:21 +0100 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:49:21 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:49:08 +0100 Lines: 10 Message-ID: References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <52B3EE9B-9B4A-4F96-ADE3-83F56135183D@moneybookers.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101102 Thunderbird/3.1.6 In-Reply-To: <52B3EE9B-9B4A-4F96-ADE3-83F56135183D@moneybookers.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 12:49:22 -0000 On 07/01/2011 16:23, Stefan Lambrev wrote: > Hi, > > Having in mind that a SAS enterprise disk normally can handle 150-180IOPS, this benchmark is testing something else ;) It depends - since ZFS is logging all the time it doesn't have to seek as much; if all transactions are WRITE and given sequentially, they will be written to the drive sequentially, even with full fsync semantics. But 75k IOPS is a bit too much :) From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 10 13:07:09 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D41AC1065670; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:07:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (muon.cran.org.uk [IPv6:2a01:348:0:15:5d59:5c40:0:1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6364E8FC13; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:07:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5978AE8B4C; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:07:08 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from :to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mail; bh=Fv6Z7cW3UeQ5 CZy2TjofExv+7pE=; b=ljsWPXyaj36IfSDTeqYlAZMco0M6FDkSs+hUm2pFuecS q4jO6A/dFl9gY11QNGYXX/ZJib8+AkugygcJTRBqk92DFwBzxp2KsjHxzujNm19f NcyFqIBsUWje+qmMr3d6BtFEM4vrod8P73Z/tJhLXVa1XVHv4OznyKfSgIdgVhw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from:to :cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=mail; b=FWrhP4 uqTWgYX2VAGJXgW1dLGk8rMFmN0b6OGfh0Ox/1jTEDwP8aaTT1ly7esZ6f3xd1Cw 6ZOlcutmHQpj6AaKgk6DsTLZWRlgN0BKDoJ2PIvuPqvPS8bMgfgyq6hK9cA9hOzd MxrTiTYEaS5R+DzaHXUSxnkCE3zL14fdOc5FE= Received: from unknown (client-86-27-23-77.glfd.adsl.virginmedia.com [86.27.23.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 158AAE8B4B; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:07:08 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:07:03 +0000 From: Bruce Cran To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20110110130703.000047b7@unknown> In-Reply-To: References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <52B3EE9B-9B4A-4F96-ADE3-83F56135183D@moneybookers.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.16.0; i586-pc-mingw32msvc) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:07:09 -0000 On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:49:08 +0100 Ivan Voras wrote: > It depends - since ZFS is logging all the time it doesn't have to > seek as much; if all transactions are WRITE and given sequentially, > they will be written to the drive sequentially, even with full fsync > semantics. But 75k IOPS is a bit too much :) I've been doing some benchmarking using sysutils/fio recently. It seems that for my desktop SATA disk (a Samsung F3) around 28-30k iops is about the maximum, seen both on Windows 7 (NTFS) and FreeBSD (ZFS). FreeBSD is much more bursty compared to Windows, getting 80k iops and 210MB/s for a few seconds followed by several of 0. -- Bruce Cran From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 10 09:33:17 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C3AC106567A; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 09:33:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arved@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gazoz.arved.priv.at (cl-1383.ham-01.de.sixxs.net [IPv6:2001:6f8:900:566::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC088FC12; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 09:33:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from inek.local.arved.priv.at (inek-gif0.arved.priv.at [IPv6:2001:6f8:13fb::2]) by gazoz.arved.priv.at (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p0A9XEEG057833; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:33:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from arved@FreeBSD.org) Received: from elma.arved.priv.at (elma.arved.priv.at [IPv6:2001:6f8:13fb:3:21b:63ff:fe04:1687] (may be forged)) by inek.local.arved.priv.at (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p0A9X9LV084770; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:33:14 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from arved@FreeBSD.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Tilman_Keskin=F6z?= In-Reply-To: <4D2AAC00.1010408@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:33:07 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2EE65B01-8B8A-4DA4-8D8E-B519487FF02C@FreeBSD.org> References: <4D2AAC00.1010408@gmail.com> To: Gholam Mostafa Faridi X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:07:38 +0000 Cc: freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: connect to VPN server with l2tp X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 09:33:17 -0000 On Jan 10, 2011, at 07:49 , Gholam Mostafa Faridi wrote: > I use FreeBSD AMD64 with Gnome , my friend manage VPN on FreeBSD box = and it use L2tp method. > So my friend say when I want use it , I must use it with l2tp method = or way , > I search google and I see I can use l2tp for connect to VPN or MPD. > So for connect to server what I must do ? > Do I need I run IPSEC on my system or no ? > Do I need config l2tp ? > my friend only give me username and password and IP of server and say = I can use these for connect server > Hello, Additional, if it is a commercial vpn-server security/vpnc might be your = choice. It is probably best to ask your friend how it is supposed to work= From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 10 13:12:46 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F4D4106566B for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:12:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4B978FC16 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:12:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PcHYC-0007JB-P8 for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:12:44 +0100 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:12:44 +0100 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:12:44 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:12:32 +0100 Lines: 19 Message-ID: References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <52B3EE9B-9B4A-4F96-ADE3-83F56135183D@moneybookers.com> <20110110130703.000047b7@unknown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101102 Thunderbird/3.1.6 In-Reply-To: <20110110130703.000047b7@unknown> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:12:46 -0000 On 10/01/2011 14:07, Bruce Cran wrote: > On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:49:08 +0100 > Ivan Voras wrote: > >> It depends - since ZFS is logging all the time it doesn't have to >> seek as much; if all transactions are WRITE and given sequentially, >> they will be written to the drive sequentially, even with full fsync >> semantics. But 75k IOPS is a bit too much :) > > I've been doing some benchmarking using sysutils/fio recently. It seems > that for my desktop SATA disk (a Samsung F3) around 28-30k iops is about > the maximum, seen both on Windows 7 (NTFS) and FreeBSD (ZFS). > FreeBSD is much more bursty compared to Windows, getting 80k iops and > 210MB/s for a few seconds followed by several of 0. I've also noticed it is bursty - this can be moderated by tuning vfs.zfs.txg.timeout and vfs.zfs.vdev.max_pending. But I think you must agree that 210 MB/s on a single drive looks impossible :) I get that much in a SAS RAID-10 configuration. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 10 13:33:56 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7ABB106566B; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:33:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (muon.cran.org.uk [IPv6:2a01:348:0:15:5d59:5c40:0:1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EBDE8FC0A; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:33:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id C711FE8B4C; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:33:55 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from :to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mail; bh=Vx5/eHEaz9/P as02IDLQIIofUsU=; b=dM30Ulby9aNNLNL7lksEQamaHH+XdXPbulnTCgjnukIB iivpzSs/WvA+CefaIjyTBRECle1hnwcpy/xVaZWFk4mGQ8RQeCY70HeZqB9Kv67Q BQQimpdjhfxATIFy+cVTgRxi6gct7kGjw/p/hpfMG7MR0zpJrf5vbhasJKRhNM4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from:to :cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=mail; b=Ekle1W kzky+ElZ3mYJMeodFUX3gpStPeBhB098YsjbUvS1nB8OSSW8TiJiecc9IU/Qov6F DrjD93+3Fnz59itCAmza1qySW3+qBSXiDfZpJHf9y0kkVbXkDDe0Sr5VFoe0baka 4A0vrKsxcXYFwazTj4tDpxW6YVpeRdeALCZlA= Received: from unknown (client-86-27-23-77.glfd.adsl.virginmedia.com [86.27.23.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 83390E8B4B; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:33:55 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:33:51 +0000 From: Bruce Cran To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20110110133351.00007c8b@unknown> In-Reply-To: References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <52B3EE9B-9B4A-4F96-ADE3-83F56135183D@moneybookers.com> <20110110130703.000047b7@unknown> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.16.0; i586-pc-mingw32msvc) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:33:57 -0000 On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:12:32 +0100 Ivan Voras wrote: > I've also noticed it is bursty - this can be moderated by tuning > vfs.zfs.txg.timeout and vfs.zfs.vdev.max_pending. But I think you > must agree that 210 MB/s on a single drive looks impossible :) I get > that much in a SAS RAID-10 configuration. Exactly: since the disk obviously can't write at 210MB/s (115 seems to be about its maximum) ZFS is buffering the data and then has to spend time flushing it to disk during which time it can't accept any new IO requests. -- Bruce Cran