Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:01:03 -0600 (MDT) From: Atipa <freebsd@atipa.com> To: Boris Staeblow <balu@dva.in-berlin.de> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Very slow Ethernet-performance with de0 Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970814085502.12667A-100000@dot.ishiboo.com> In-Reply-To: <m0wz0Eo-000K4tC@dva.in-berlin.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Have you tried the alternate de driver from ftp.3amsoftware.com? I have found that is works really well, especially on not-so-common NICs (generics, etc.). The timings can be off on the standard driver. I have also had very similar results with a NIC that went bad during a sup. That was the hardest thing in the world to diagnose, since my constant had been, "well, I KNOW the ethernet card works since it was fine yesterday..." After 6 hours, I finally decided to try a different card and it fixed eveything. Kevin On Thu, 14 Aug 1997, Boris Staeblow wrote: > > I've big problems with performance on my local network. > Both machines (P166/P200 MMX, 430 HX) running (very) current (as of Aug 13) > - same DEC21041 based network cards. No special kernel-configs. > > host1: > ------ > de0: <Digital 21041 Ethernet> rev 0x11 int a irq 9 on pci0.10.0 > de0: 21041 [10Mb/s] pass 1.1 > de0: address 00:80:ad:1c:af:a8 > > de0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 > inet 10.0.0.10 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255 > ether 00:80:ad:1c:af:a8 > media: autoselect (10base2/BNC) status: active > > host2: > ------ > > de0: <Digital 21041 Ethernet> rev 0x11 int a irq 11 on pci0.13.0 > de0: 21041 [10Mb/s] pass 1.1 > de0: address 00:80:ad:1c:ac:97 > > de0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 > inet 10.0.0.11 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255 > ether 00:80:ad:1c:ac:97 > media: autoselect (10base2/BNC) status: active > > > benchmark on a NFS-mounted drive: > > % iozone 10 > > Writing the 10 Megabyte file, 'iozone.tmp'...16.531250 seconds > Reading the file...55.671875 seconds > > IOZONE performance measurements: > 634299 bytes/second for writing the file > 188349 bytes/second for reading the file > > ftp-benchmark: > > ncftp>mget test.tgz > Receiving file: test.tgz > 100% 0 2576406 bytes. ETA: 0:00 > test.tgz: 2576406 bytes received in 157.45 seconds, 15.98 K/s. > ^^^^^^^^^ > > telnet: > > When i cat a large ascii-file in a telnet session the transfer stops > sometimes for 1-2 secs. > > ping-test: > > % ping -c 100000 -f host2 > PING host2 (10.0.0.11): 56 data bytes > ..................... > --- host2 ping statistics --- > 100020 packets transmitted, 100000 packets received, 0% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.294/0.520/17.794/0.300 ms > > (seems to be OK) > > - cable + termination is 100% ok > - Filetransfers with Windows 95 on both sides are perfecly fast. > - There's no additional network load (tested with tcpdump) > - This performance problem exist since serval months > > Can someone give me a hint? Anyone with similar problems? > > Boris > > -- > balu@dva.in-berlin.de > Boris Staeblow >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.970814085502.12667A-100000>