Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 16:21:41 -0400 From: Michael Butler <imb@protected-networks.net> To: Kris von Mach <mach@swishmail.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em performs worse than igb (latency wise) in 12? Message-ID: <4f9b9259-f5a1-ecc6-366e-4a26de0ca3dc@protected-networks.net> In-Reply-To: <f4474976-37af-13cc-d8f6-771eef2c889e@swishmail.com> References: <b910baa6-6428-67fa-5df4-49b777e770d1@swishmail.com> <7673edad-1e50-7e9b-961e-f28ab7a0f41e@ingresso.co.uk> <f4474976-37af-13cc-d8f6-771eef2c889e@swishmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2019-04-06 08:58, Kris von Mach wrote: > On 4/6/2019 2:56 AM, Pete French wrote: >> Something odd going on there there - I am using 12-STABLE and I have >> igb just fine, and it attaches to the same hardware that 11 did: > > I ran apache bench, and I got a result of 100 requests/sec on 12-STABLE > vs 16,000 requests/sec on 11-STABLE. So something is definitely wrong. > Nothing changed other than going from 11 to 12. I'd be interested to see if substituting the port net/intel-em-kmod has any effect on the issue, imb
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4f9b9259-f5a1-ecc6-366e-4a26de0ca3dc>