From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 30 17:07:19 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23702106566B for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 17:07:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kes-kes@yandex.ru) Received: from forward19.mail.yandex.net (forward19.mail.yandex.net [95.108.253.144]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9343E8FC15 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 17:07:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp16.mail.yandex.net (smtp16.mail.yandex.net [95.108.252.16]) by forward19.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 6E6B63440BAC; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 21:07:11 +0400 (MSD) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1288458431; bh=O5D3Cos12ut2I5zr8JvFNBCQ9lShlH8Oxwhgk7W4Wmw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:Message-ID:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=oFTHXgFbhlPoCaqeTKYC12Qae3aArgMDvRO+qCCUxkY+rPysE5cgnwPEuJCCQl1G6 li4l+YtjG3599diMUI8RSW5HeOvODkqPge/h4k56FrnktxgONJgVO+T8635NRtGZOy wsqn43Ezjpl5dzCutY7SIlyivB/pR6BX1NDdomkM= Received: from HOMEUSER (unknown [77.93.38.34]) by smtp16.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTPA id 74D3416000A5; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 21:07:10 +0400 (MSD) X-Nat-Received: from [192.168.11.204]:4025 [ident-empty] by SPAM FILTER: with TPROXY id 1288458008.38693 abuse-to kes-kes@yandex.ru Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 20:07:11 +0300 From: =?windows-1251?B?yu7t/Oru4iDF4uPl7ejp?= X-Mailer: The Bat! (v4.0.24) Professional Organization: =?windows-1251?B?188gyu7t/Oru4iwgRnJlZUxpbmU=?= X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1698885470.20101030200711@yandex.ru> To: Pyun YongHyeon In-Reply-To: <20101029181745.GC19479@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <364322520.20101029102010@yandex.ru> <20101029181745.GC19479@michelle.cdnetworks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Yandex-TimeMark: 1288458431 X-Yandex-Spam: 1 X-Yandex-Front: smtp16.mail.yandex.net Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re[2]: How to obtain place of low perfomance? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: =?windows-1251?B?yu7t/Oru4iDF4uPl7ejp?= List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 17:07:19 -0000 Hello, Pyun. Вы писали 29 октября 2010 г., 21:17:45: PY> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:20:10AM +0300, ?????????????? ?????????????? wrote: >> Hi, Freebsd-net. >> >> serv1# ifocnfig nfe0 >> nfe0: flags=8943 metric 0 mtu 1500 >> options=10b >> ether 00:13:d4:ce:82:16 >> inet 10.11.8.17 netmask 0xfffffc00 broadcast 10.11.11.255 >> inet 10.11.8.15 netmask 0xfffffc00 broadcast 10.11.11.255 >> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX ) >> status: active >> serv1# ifconfig igb0 >> igb0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 >> options=19b >> ether 00:1b:21:45:da:b8 >> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX ) >> status: active >> serv1# ifconfig vlan7 >> vlan7: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 >> options=3 >> ether 00:1b:21:45:da:b8 >> inet 10.11.15.15 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.11.15.255 >> inet 10.11.7.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.11.7.255 >> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX ) >> status: active >> vlan: 7 parent interface: igb0 >> >> doing bw test with iperf it show low performance on nfe0. >> >> # iperf -c 10.11.8.17 >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Client connecting to 10.11.8.17, TCP port 5001 >> TCP window size: 32.5 KByte (default) >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> [ 3] local 10.11.8.16 port 63911 connected with 10.11.8.17 port 5001 >> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth >> [ 3] 0.0-10.5 sec 124 MBytes 98.8 Mbits/sec >> # iperf -c 10.11.7.1 >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Client connecting to 10.11.7.1, TCP port 5001 >> TCP window size: 32.5 KByte (default) >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> [ 3] local 10.11.7.2 port 61422 connected with 10.11.7.1 port 5001 >> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth >> [ 3] 0.0-10.3 sec 800 MBytes 653 Mbits/sec >> >> despite on it is integrated I expect about 300-400Mbit throughput >> does nfe0 really so poor NIC? PY> nfe(4) controllers would not be one of best controllers targeted PY> for server environments but generally it's not poor for desktop PY> users. I mean you should be able to saturate link when you use bulk PY> TCP/UDP transfers. PY> Last time I tried iperf it was not reliable. Did you disable PY> threading of iperf? Also note, both sender/receiver of iperf should PY> be built with same configuration option. igb and nfe on same machine. --------------\igb 10.11.7.1 CLIENT/ SERVER \--------------/nfe 10.11.8.17 -- С уважением, Коньков mailto:kes-kes@yandex.ru