Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:52:05 +0300 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@serebryakov.spb.ru> To: Eugene Grosbein <egrosbein@rdtc.ru> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: E4500 spend one core to saturate 1Gbit/s link with TCP -- is it nornal? Message-ID: <1983605521.20101221125205@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <4D104702.40208@rdtc.ru> References: <12810339411.20101220205327@serebryakov.spb.ru> <4D0FB1B1.7070703@rdtc.ru> <1647893939.20101220234453@serebryakov.spb.ru> <4D104702.40208@rdtc.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Eugene. You wrote 21 =C4=C5=CB=C1=C2=D2=D1 2010 =C7., 9:19:46: >>>> Is it normal, that 2.2GHz core is needed to saturate 1Gib link with >>>> only one client (and one TCP connction), or I have something >>>> misconfigured? >>> Compare with ftpd that uses sendfile() kernel function. >> simple "iperf" shows almost same load (slightly less, but it shows >> slightly less speed, about 800Mbit). >>=20 > iperf is bad tool IMHO, it abuses gettimeofday() system call and wastes t= oo much CPU time. > Compare with ftpd that uses sendfile() kernel function. system ftpd twice slower (or I can not find good FTP client for Windowsn -- I've tried FAR, wget/cygwin and "native" ftp), but load is significally less. On the other hand, when I rebuilt kernelk wit DEVICE_POLLING and turned polling on, load decrease to 10-15% of one core in case of samba :) --=20 // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@serebryakov.spb.ru>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1983605521.20101221125205>