Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 18:55:35 +0100 From: Damien Fleuriot <ml@my.gd> To: "Vogel, Jack" <jack.vogel@intel.com> Cc: "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com>, "freebsd-pf@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: High interrupt rate on a PF box + performance Message-ID: <4D41B197.6070308@my.gd> In-Reply-To: <1DB50624F8348F48840F2E2CF6040A9D014BEB8833@orsmsx508.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <4D41417A.20904@my.gd> <20110127172724.GA36587@icarus.home.lan> <4D41ABF1.1010405@my.gd> <1DB50624F8348F48840F2E2CF6040A9D014BEB8833@orsmsx508.amr.corp.intel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1/27/11 6:41 PM, Vogel, Jack wrote: > Jeremy is right, if you have a problem the first step is to try the latest code. > > However, when I look at the interrupts below I don't see what the problem is? > The Broadcom seems to have about the same rate, it just doesn't have MSIX (multiple vectors). > > Jack > > My main concern is that the CPU %interrupt is quite high, also, we seem to be experiencing input errors on the interfaces. See for yourself the following munin graphs: http://my.gd/fw_graphs/ igb0 = WAN interf bce0 = LAN Obviously we've had quite a traffic increase since the beginning of the year, as shown by the PF statistics. But jeez, the CPU %interrupt doubled or tripled... You'll notice a drop in graphs between 23 and 25 january, this is when we switched the CARP master to the backup firewall.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D41B197.6070308>