From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 28 22:04:32 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69AC91065670 for ; Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:04:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from c47g@gmx.at) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C94C88FC18 for ; Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:04:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from c47g@gmx.at) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Dec 2008 22:04:30 -0000 Received: from cm56-152-15.liwest.at (EHLO bones) [86.56.152.15] by mail.gmx.net (mp005) with SMTP; 28 Dec 2008 23:04:30 +0100 X-Authenticated: #9978462 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19/xzIBJTt/K6HAIwHwefaFyMJ4fNiWpuQvrRK4m1 sT6IqrJ30pZBAT From: Christian Gusenbauer To: "Kip Macy" Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 23:04:52 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <200812281856.20118.c47g@gmx.at> <3c1674c90812281352s62d3654n983b6eab90567778@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3c1674c90812281352s62d3654n983b6eab90567778@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200812282304.52368.c47g@gmx.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.63 Cc: qingli@freebsd.org, "Li, Qing" , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Network slowdown on lo0 introduced with svn186119/186121 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:04:32 -0000 Hi Kip! Hmmm, I thought amanda is using a localhost connection? But you're right. If I test connections using the 'discard' or 'echo' service with the IP address of my lan interface, I get this terrible throughput, too. Using the localhost address the throughput is *much* better! Thanks, Christian. On Sunday 28 December 2008, Kip Macy wrote: > This problem can reproduced with netperf. 127.0.0.1 will give good > throughput, but using the IP address of one of the interfaces gives > terrible throughput. > > -Kip > > On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Li, Qing wrote: > > Hi Christian, > > > > Is the loopback address or an address that is assigned to > > an interface used by amanda? Would it be possible for you > > to give me some information on the tests you performed and > > on your method of measurement? > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- Qing > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org on behalf of Christian Gusenbauer > > Sent: Sun 12/28/2008 9:56 AM > > To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org > > Subject: Network slowdown on lo0 introduced with svn186119/186121 > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > Today I built a new kernel on current and experienced a massive network > > slowdown on lo0 when doing a backup using amanda. I made some tests and > > it seems that the commits 186119 and 186121 to the svn repository are > > causing it. A kernel based on revision 186107 runs fine and all kernels > > starting with revison 186119 do not. > > > > This slowdown seems to appear only on the loopback interface, not on my > > lan interface. > > > > Is this a known issue? > > > > Regards, > > Christian. > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > > "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > > "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"