From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Jun 18 13:19:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA08822 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:19:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from verdi.nethelp.no (verdi.nethelp.no [195.1.171.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA08811 for ; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:18:56 -0700 (PDT) From: sthaug@nethelp.no Received: (qmail 3668 invoked by uid 1001); 18 Jun 1997 20:18:38 +0000 (GMT) To: ccsanady@scl.ameslab.gov Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, matt@3am-software.com Subject: Re: Network concurrency problems!? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:57:12 -0500" References: <9706181357.ZM5365@phantasm.scl.ameslab.gov> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.05+ on Emacs 19.28.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:18:38 +0200 Message-ID: <3666.866665118@verdi.nethelp.no> Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Some background.. I have 2 ppro200 machines running 2.2.2 with 4 back > to back full duplex 100Mbps connections. (and 2 10Mbps connections to > a real network.) These are all SMC 10/100 cards, using Matt's 960603 > drivers. I am concurrently running NetPIPE over each of the links. It > tests TCP, using a range of increasing block sizes. (info at > http://www.scl.ameslab.gov/netpipe) > > I don't know if this is a generic problem or driver specific, but when I > have 2-4 cards in a machine, I am only able to saturate one link with > larger transfer sizes. With 4 cards, at approx 6k, and 16k, two of the > pipes are completely starved. The last runs about 10Mbps slower. Also, > there appear to be hundreds of thousands of collisions on a couple of the > interfaces. (This should be impossible, correct?) Collisions are a sign that your interfaces are *not* running full duplex. Also, if you expect a PPro-200 to saturate 4 100 Mbps links, I think you are a wee bit optimistic. (One link, no problem.) Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no