From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 24 07:04:11 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C5A516A4CE; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 07:04:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pathfinder.roks.biz (roks.biz [82.207.80.37]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20C043D1D; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 07:04:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from padla@roks.biz) Received: from admin.office.roks.biz (admin.office.roks.biz [192.168.100.103]) by pathfinder.roks.biz (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i7O746uq082266; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:04:07 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from padla@pathfinder.roks.biz) Received: from admin.office.roks.biz (localhost.roks.biz [127.0.0.1]) i7O746BS000500; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:04:06 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from padla@admin.office.roks.biz) Received: (from padla@localhost) by admin.office.roks.biz (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i7O744HY000499; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:04:05 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from padla) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:04:04 +0300 From: Nikolay Pavlov To: Infomatik Message-ID: <20040824070404.GA218@roks.biz> Mail-Followup-To: Nikolay Pavlov , Infomatik , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20040823095502.GA757@roks.biz> <200408231410.36111.info@matik.com.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200408231410.36111.info@matik.com.br> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Poor results of network perfomance with 5.2.1-p9. X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 07:04:11 -0000 Hi, FreeBSD users. On Monday, 23 August 2004 at 14:10:36 -0300, Infomatik wrote: > I am not so sure if your test is giving any usable result for FreeBSD. > > It seems you are using some wireless equipment between both servers what means > that the throuput depends on this APs first. > Any correctly cabled 10/100 NIC should give higher throughput than any > available 802.11b network equipment. > Even if you have a clean radio connection (> 25Db SNR on each side) between > both APs, low(est) noise and a PP correctly configured you never get full > duplex , one direction ever is slower. Also it depends on the distance > between both points I believe. > There are also several issues with the wireless equipments, may be you never > get some usable cicles from an AP when it is highly used by another > connection already. > > May be you first check your radio connection and before running a test between > both server you check pinging the remote AP (even flooding) to see how > capable your radio is. I guess you never get more than 1-1.5MB/s > bi-directional between both servers. You may get sustained transfer rates of > 3-6MB/s in one direction only but I do not know this APs enough to say it > exactly. > > If you need higher traffic you should use Tsunami WL-PP-bridges or 802.11a/b/g > cards configured as adhoc instead of this cheap APs connected to your NICs You are right. This damned chinese AP again and again let down me. I have found a huge amount of drops on send queue in 5.2.1 side. When I have drop speed down to 2 Mb/s on both AP results of test were leveled on a mark 1.35 Mb/s. Sorry for that noise and thank's for your time. Best regards, Nikolay Pavlov.