Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 20 Oct 2018 06:23:29 +0700
From:      Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>
To:        Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: What is best TCP throughput benchmarking tool?
Message-ID:  <78b23b34-7c47-30a1-4386-405ec90fa76d@grosbein.net>
In-Reply-To: <876446461.20181020020328@serebryakov.spb.ru>
References:  <eaf633d0-beb7-d806-7d2e-bfec0beb1e47@FreeBSD.org> <650aa1c7-26db-f463-cb59-8dfe1886c764@grosbein.net> <1743704969.20181019235034@serebryakov.spb.ru> <04f00191-78b8-6c9f-4b6b-fb11d10f91ea@grosbein.net> <876446461.20181020020328@serebryakov.spb.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
20.10.2018 6:03, Lev Serebryakov wrote:

>>>>>  Please note, that I'm testing endpoint, not a router, so netmap-based
>>>>> packet generators & receivers is no use for me, unfortunately.
>>>> Try benchmarks/wrk. It works pretty well for speeds lower than 40Gbit/s
>>>> but its version 4.0.2 had its own rough edges demanding a router between TCP endpoints.
>>>> I have not tried its newer versions, though.
>>>  Looks like benchmark/wrk is HTTP benchmark, opposite to what I need...
>> Together with nginx, wrk can serve as quick TCP traffic generator/receiver.
>> I've used them in 40G environment with success.
>  To be honest, I don't want to run nginx on both ends (and I need to test
> both directions) and it is hard to control time of one connection (by
> sending file size?) and monitor speed in test progress...

You do not need to micro-control this. The wrk provides you with nice stats
plus you have counters of "systat -ifstat 1" during long test.

>  All these tools — wrk, nginx — are optimized for many concurrent
> connections on powerful hardware and looks like overkill to test one
> connection bandwidth on Atom CPU.

You can choose number of concurrent connections yourself while running wrk.
 
>  BTW, how to configure nginx to server 16G+ file without any disk access?
> One big hole on tmpfs? :)

You do not need large disk file in case of wrk+nginx. Make small-sized tmpfs
with single several megabytes-sized file, and that's all.





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?78b23b34-7c47-30a1-4386-405ec90fa76d>