Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 01:00:03 +0700 From: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@kuzbass.ru> To: pete wright <nomadlogic@gmail.com> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: benchmark Message-ID: <20070105180003.GA23331@svzserv.kemerovo.su> In-Reply-To: <57d710000701050956j36433495v72b62a9404a25a5d@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070105174350.GA21615@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <57d710000701050956j36433495v72b62a9404a25a5d@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 09:56:31AM -0800, pete wright wrote: > >Tried to use iperf from ports in UDP mode with 64 byte payload, > >but it calls gettimeofday() after each write and gives me about 80Kpps only > >for Pentium D 2.8Ghz. > > > >What alternative should I use? May be, a netgraph node? > > I've done some benchmarking/testing of 10gig-e NIC's using a combo of > iperf/netgraph and ttcp with good results. all are available in > ports. What pps numbers had you obtained? What CPU had you used? I don't like iperf for gettimeofday() overhead. Eugene
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070105180003.GA23331>