From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 20 08:13:07 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 235671065672; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:13:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from leccine@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f210.google.com (mail-fx0-f210.google.com [209.85.220.210]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F7498FC19; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:13:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm6 with SMTP id 6so5796453fxm.43 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:13:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=sTv/7T8hHj+50sTFFkvQiUcnJ1veyplreir7Egnf4vo=; b=P80RfcbdZTafBrRLgVkT6SJPxQCQimgwLNgK68MTa50XV1Q/kopvKoKkkpqqwnrcpq CaPgnweRfZlodbFqVALAZZQODXRsU48wfw9b8ud5txrQ8O0dTrOqJDE369xwd0aIOZja jN1j4CMfr1bB9aeYsn3/i8sZrPguYlEYTtDBk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=B7XEPtp84f351HRToDZmOcJQzSEJffjW9sRr6SfGkH/e98uL9HgwzXxFNrDSoXKE0n xRJPYMnqrTMX8TEDcqwtk0gs5dbB8TX1CVBkl7tWOFl3PJe9tMha2EsChCtoyxT7ndKa NWzdSuJoUW4IAPmJZWgwSjnXCfKjAOrMS7snU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.160.65 with SMTP id m1mr6123494bkx.193.1256026385231; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:13:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <78DB4AE8EF5F4A1EBD3992D7404B2725@china.huawei.com> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:13:05 +0100 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?Q?Istv=C3=A1n?= To: Adrian Chadd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Hongtao Yin , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Brent Jones Subject: Re: Comparison of FreeBSD/Linux TCP Throughput 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: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0000 i see but there was no debt that it is possible. at least from my side :_) On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > 2009/10/20 Istv=C3=A1n : > > > > therefore i like netpipe runs you can see the performance and the laten= cy > as > > well using the packet size as your "x" axis, i think it makes more sens= e > > then just 1 number > > My point was to demonstrate that saturating gigabit ethernet is very > doable with FreeBSD, and his limitation is more likely somewhere other > than "TCP". > > I've told him privately to check CPU utilisation. I'll do the same on > my boxes when I get some time; I'd like to know why I'm only seeing ~ > 800mbit with large buffers. > --=20 the sun shines for all http://l1xl1x.blogspot.com