From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Sep 17 11:05:01 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 175C916A4D3
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:05:01 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from cmung3277.cmu.carnet.hr (cmung3277.cmu.carnet.hr
	[193.198.140.229])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1999643D2D
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:05:00 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from zec@icir.org)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by tpx30 (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i8HB2UcV000378;
	Fri, 17 Sep 2004 13:02:30 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from zec@icir.org)
From: Marko Zec <zec@icir.org>
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, donatas <donatas@lrtc.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 13:02:30 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <030a01c49c9f$7c215970$f2f109d9@donatas>
In-Reply-To: <030a01c49c9f$7c215970$f2f109d9@donatas>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-4"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200409171302.30120.zec@icir.org>
Subject: Re: ng_one2many - very slow
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:05:01 -0000

On Friday 17 September 2004 12:17, donatas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we need a 400Mbit link between two intel machines (Xeon 2.4, Raid,
> 512DDr, 2 ports-em(1000Mbit),2 ports-fxp(100Mbit))
>
> ....
>
> truth, we've tested direct link between em adapters in gigabit mode
> and using TCP packets 850Mbit throughput was achieved. And Nearly
> 1Gbit with UDP packets.
>
> as you see one2many test results aren't even close to 400Mbit
> Is it possible that em and fxp cannot work together or something.
> what can you suggest to solve this small problem?


Perhaps TCP packets are arriving out of order for some reason (interrupt 
coalescing etc.) which can be _bad_ for TCP throughput.  What kind of 
CPU load are you observing on those machines, when testing a single 
Gbit link versus a 4*100M bundle?

Marko