From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 5 18:36:51 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 435A716A400 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2007 18:36:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dgilbert@daveg.ca) Received: from ox.eicat.ca (ox.eicat.ca [66.96.30.35]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1418B13C4B7 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2007 18:36:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dgilbert@daveg.ca) Received: by ox.eicat.ca (Postfix, from userid 66) id A1251D651; Mon, 5 Mar 2007 13:36:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by canoe.dclg.ca (Postfix, from userid 101) id 6264561C8A; Mon, 5 Mar 2007 13:36:56 -0500 (EST) From: David Gilbert MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17900.25416.355835.2354@canoe.dclg.ca> Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 13:36:56 -0500 To: Eric Anderson In-Reply-To: <45E57EB5.4070703@freebsd.org> References: <20070224215508.GA41968@xor.obsecurity.org> <45E13410.7020505@he.iki.fi> <20070225071946.GA48242@xor.obsecurity.org> <45E14BAD.80909@he.iki.fi> <20070225084737.GA49231@xor.obsecurity.org> <5a0a9d6f0702260936u3408f8d8rd4cde9234b2f7776@mail.gmail.com> <45E54619.7000503@isc.org> <45E57EB5.4070703@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 20) "Double Solitaire" XEmacs Lucid Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Peter Losher Subject: Re: UDP performance. X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 18:36:51 -0000 >>>>> "Eric" == Eric Anderson writes: Eric> On 02/28/07 03:06, Peter Losher wrote: >> Ivan Voras wrote: >> We recently put a stock Fedora Core 6 and a stock FreeBSD 6.2 on >> the same HW (HP ProLiant DL320 G5 Dual Core Xeons w/ 16GB RAM) and >> running BIND 9.4.0 and a well known ccTLD zone that we slammed a >> query stream to. On a single threaded BIND, there was a 20% >> advantage to Linux, on a multi threaded build, Linux trounced >> FreeBSD (39k to 89k queries/sec) I don't believe this is specifically a FreeBSD UDP performance issue. Using NSD as the nameserver and fast core-2 duos, FreeBSD was able to old 140k queries/sec while linux (on the same machine) ran 90k queries per second. This was using two server threads. I believe the numbers were 120k and 80k for one server thread. But: the whole reason I'm testing NSD for a client is because BIND has huge performance bottlenecks with large zones (bind reportedly takes 20 minutes from when it run to when it's ready to serve the first query). Dave. -- ============================================================================ |David Gilbert, Independent Contractor. | Two things can be | |Mail: dave@daveg.ca | equal if and only if they | |http://daveg.ca | are precisely opposite. | =========================================================GLO================