From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 20 19:21:37 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6990F1AE for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:21:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from outbackdingo@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ie0-f182.google.com (mail-ie0-f182.google.com [209.85.223.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25ED38FC14 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:21:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id s9so3298491iec.13 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:21:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=9MnT68T03oXjXZQFQJ5MFyN2vyuUr8V6zfQXvk4EPNM=; b=zLsPvYhQLiseoyKnYVUaS81XyNhTCYa7AZqb1R76YNjVJJmmj6W+UJ9WcHliGWvvPa w5ipjzv0PmURdXpPB/lIykNX2125WiN5SCu7GfFblHCbCCb8cr9frRdnYPdbR8t/5w2r CZXhrYRGtoYMTOTKFkXO2Ulr+/4yuHw0i+uXi1Sy0JFh9mT8K3UM2xKd74DywEmt/hrD RsN05YObuE7Ky0Voq0dz2BRN04SpOpHzA3CXiz7P+eW3/CqC2L5wL6X680Xir7i0MLVw C2sreryVH/Re1wjzX3XV0NNOTHZp9tZlVGESthHeoliYDgiSJalD3KWl1g5Mxy4Av/Tn Aceg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.43.69.206 with SMTP id yd14mr14938268icb.57.1353439296485; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:21:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.27.225 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:21:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1281530059.17550.1353434227450@238ae4dab3b4454b88aea4d9f7c372c1.nuevasync.com> References: <20121120174554.GC50873@equilibrium.bsdes.net> <1281530059.17550.1353434227450@238ae4dab3b4454b88aea4d9f7c372c1.nuevasync.com> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 14:21:36 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD boxes as a 'router'... From: Outback Dingo To: khatfield@socllc.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: "freebsd-isp@freebsd.org" , Victor Balada Diaz , John Fretby X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:21:37 -0000 you can also use luigis netmap with certain cards and a patched open-vswitch if its purely a routing platform to potentially increase performance, we are currently working on a prototype in our lab to replace an older cisco On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, wrote: > One thing I have noticed is mixed results with polling depending on the > version. > > My experience with similar NICs was that polling increased the PPS > capabilities up to 7.4 but post 7.4 we have seen most cases where polling > caused either connectivity issues or decreased overall performance. > > Now we were running full 1Gbps in our tests. With only 140Mbps you should > be able to handle this amount without polling or additional kernel tweaks= . > Specifically with 9 - I would recommend doing needed sysctl tweaks withou= t > polling and as long as you are not receiving DDoS traffic then it should > prove perfectly stable. > > > > On Nov 20, 2012, at 11:46 AM, "Victor Balada Diaz" > wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 03:35:13PM +0000, John Fretby wrote: > >> Howdy all, > >> > >> We've currently got an ageing HP DL360 running as a 'router' - it has > >> 100Mbit in/out onto our network, and has two 'bce' NIC's providing > in/out. > >> It's running quite an old version of FreeBSD (6 I think) - but works. > >> > >> As the network gets busier we've noticed the amount of interrupt time > on it > >> is climbing (as you'd expect - i.e. esp. if many small packets are bei= ng > >> forwarded). Many moons ago we did experiment with this box - and enabl= ed > >> device polling (inc. upping the HZ on the box and recompiling the kern= el > >> etc). This didn't work very well at the time (probably because it was = in > >> it's infancy) so we left it off in the end. > >> > >> If we were to replace this box, with something new - say a SuperMicro > based > >> system with two: > >> > >> Intel 82574L's (em Driver Based) > >> > >> And enable polling - is it likely to "just work" these days? The curre= nt > >> upstream is 100Mbit, we're looking to upgrade this to 1Gbit in, but wi= th > >> say 200Mbit comitted on it (so shouldn't go above 200Mbit). > >> > >> Is there anything that has to be done to enable polling - other than > >> recompiling GENERIC to support it? - i.e. no HZ hacks or anything > needed on > >> 'modern' machines (it's a quad core Xeon). > > > > Hello John, > > > > You might find interesting to read this thread: > > > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2012-November/037590.h= tml > > > > In short: device polling can decrease performance on modern hardware. > > > > You might want to try upgrading to a new FreeBSD version and tuning it > somehow > > before buying a new server. More info on tuning the network stack: > > > > http://wiki.freebsd.org/NetworkPerformanceTuning > > > > Regards. > > Victor. > > -- > > La prueba m=E1s fehaciente de que existe vida inteligente en otros > > planetas, es que no han intentado contactar con nosotros. > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-isp@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-isp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-isp@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-isp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >