From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 3 06:34:16 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06332106564A for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 06:34:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from artemb@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qw0-f54.google.com (mail-qw0-f54.google.com [209.85.216.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A95968FC13 for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 06:34:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qwd6 with SMTP id 6so2891639qwd.13 for ; Sat, 02 Oct 2010 23:34:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SElVl++wsMaUdL3RGEf8R9N1tfsvWR3h/ic0w79H7j8=; b=cZe8Qsm3+2HI6J2vyzGQxMDjyBnBEZsp7CybrwlDHkCPy/IlXxryzIOoWHYxfk7B9e vhyDRLNttv+s4Jm4Odyq0BjXDUySKV36FQCmS+LCpysIXtf9MG0DKmi/fy5UCKBOjZgQ rUf1OQ23fQKMP51tgG0nWCZmO8NGBcSCv8ayY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=MjX9vXZ3rR7giKnSsGGmG7bzyDOWqBZPDljp40c+BiVahL5sNK9dmQs7JKhgVYpe9v YJoA0r21QBwXTbwi+bQigBN5oRXdsWP/3dFEUOaDNTugsauYmcxAe0fLH9NNWbMxVqK0 fDmfJeU19+CHmcOUHwEnXNIbS/TRSQGfCXOwY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.26.205 with SMTP id f13mr2029030vcc.97.1286087654685; Sat, 02 Oct 2010 23:34:14 -0700 (PDT) Sender: artemb@gmail.com Received: by 10.220.176.77 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:34:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <45cfd27021fb93f9b0877a1596089776.squirrel@nyi.unixathome.org> <4C511EF8-591C-4BB9-B7AA-30D5C3DDC0FF@langille.org> <4CA68BBD.6060601@langille.org> Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:34:14 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: DkA-zFGoUbgeAlX54bXaKVZiD3g Message-ID: From: Artem Belevich To: Sean Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-stable , Dan Langille Subject: Re: zfs send/receive: is this slow? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:34:16 -0000 I've just tested on my box and loopback interface does not seem to be the bottleneck. I can easily push through ~400MB/s through two instances of mbuffer. --Artem On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Sean wrote: > > On 02/10/2010, at 11:43 AM, Artem Belevich wrote: > >>> As soon as I opened this email I knew what it would say. >>> >>> >>> # time zfs send storage/bacula@transfer | mbuffer | zfs receive >>> storage/compressed/bacula-mbuffer >>> in @ =A0197 MB/s, out @ =A0205 MB/s, 1749 MB total, buffer =A0 0% full >> .. >>> Big difference. =A0:) >> >> I'm glad it helped. >> >> Does anyone know why sending/receiving stuff via loopback is so much >> slower compared to pipe? > > > Up and down the entire network stack, in and out of TCP buffers at both e= nds... might add some overhead, and other factors in limiting it. > > Increasing TCP buffers, and disabling delayed acks might help. Nagle migh= t also have to be disabled too. (delayed acks and nagle in combination can = interact in odd ways) > > >> >> --Artem >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " > >