From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org  Mon Aug 24 08:30:01 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA019BFA10;
 Mon, 24 Aug 2015 08:30:01 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from kabab.cs.huji.ac.il (kabab.cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.116.210])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D3C9AA;
 Mon, 24 Aug 2015 08:30:01 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from chamsa.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.80.19])
 by kabab.cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp
 id 1ZTn8g-000BKT-NA; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:29:58 +0300
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
Subject: Re: ix(intel) vs mlxen(mellanox) 10Gb performance
From: Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>
In-Reply-To: <55DAC623.60006@selasky.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:29:58 +0300
Cc: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>, pyunyh@gmail.com,
 FreeBSD stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>,
 FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <62C7B1A3-CC6B-41A1-B254-6399F19F8FF7@cs.huji.ac.il>
References: <1D52028A-B39F-4F9B-BD38-CB1D73BF5D56@cs.huji.ac.il>
 <55D43615.1030401@selasky.org>
 <2013503980.25726607.1439989235806.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca>
 <20150820023024.GB996@michelle.fasterthan.com>
 <1153838447.28656490.1440193567940.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca>
 <15D19823-08F7-4E55-BBD0-CE230F67D26E@cs.huji.ac.il>
 <818666007.28930310.1440244756872.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca>
 <49173B1F-7B5E-4D59-8651-63D97B0CB5AC@cs.huji.ac.il>
 <1815942485.29539597.1440370972998.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca>
 <55DAC623.60006@selasky.org>
To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 08:30:01 -0000


> On 24 Aug 2015, at 10:22, Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> wrote:
>=20
> On 08/24/15 01:02, Rick Macklem wrote:
>> The other thing is the degradation seems to cut the rate by about =
half each time.
>> 300-->150-->70 I have no idea if this helps to explain it.
>=20
> Might be a NUMA binding issue for the processes involved.
>=20
> man cpuset
>=20
> --HPS

I can=E2=80=99t see how this is relevant, given that the same host, =
using the mellanox/mlxen
behave much better.
I=E2=80=99m getting different results with the intel/ix depending who is =
the nfs server


danny