Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:16:57 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Istv=C3=A1n?= <leccine@gmail.com> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: Hongtao Yin <htyin@huawei.com>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Brent Jones <brent@servuhome.net> Subject: Re: Comparison of FreeBSD/Linux TCP Throughput performance Message-ID: <b8592ed80910191716v11b978c1i8bf82170e4ed6a37@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <d763ac660910181836p45aedc37v1c77f5e96b6df13b@mail.gmail.com> References: <78DB4AE8EF5F4A1EBD3992D7404B2725@china.huawei.com> <d763ac660910180755i7f6fd3c7q8578bfed11978b9d@mail.gmail.com> <ee9f3b480910181305x5c8661a7mb7bfdd2ddd0a267d@mail.gmail.com> <d763ac660910181836p45aedc37v1c77f5e96b6df13b@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > uhm: > > kristy# netperf -H 192.168.10.2 -p 22113 -l 10 > TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.10.2 > (192.168.10.2) port 0 AF_INET > Recv Send Send > Socket Socket Message Elapsed > Size Size Size Time Throughput > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > > 8192 65536 65536 10.00 862.48 > > 1 megabyte socket buffers threw an error. I'll see why later. > > Now, as for why 64k socket buffers gave a slower result than 8k socket > buffers... ah. If I change the sending end to use 64k socket buffers: > > TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.10.2 > (192.168.10.2) port 0 AF_INET > Recv Send Send > Socket Socket Message Elapsed > Size Size Size Time Throughput > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > > 65536 65536 65536 10.00 916.23 > > > > Adrian > > therefore i like netpipe runs you can see the performance and the latency as well using the packet size as your "x" axis, i think it makes more sense then just 1 number -- the sun shines for all http://l1xl1x.blogspot.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b8592ed80910191716v11b978c1i8bf82170e4ed6a37>