From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 28 20:17:05 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD8216A4CE for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:17:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.utcorp.net (mail.utcorp.net [146.145.135.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9BC743D1F for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:17:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lister@primetime.com) Received: from [10.200.1.90] (helo=[10.200.1.90]) by mail.utcorp.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1D5rVy-000HMB-MY for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:29:14 -0500 Message-ID: <4223A4B3.7000706@primetime.com> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:09:39 -0800 From: Lister User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050116) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org References: <4222C64D.4050007@primetime.com> <16931.17069.667570.224967@canoe.dclg.ca> In-Reply-To: <16931.17069.667570.224967@canoe.dclg.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-yoursite-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-yoursite-MailScanner: Found to be clean Subject: Re: ng_fec and cisco 2931 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:17:05 -0000 David Gilbert wrote: >lister> I have setup ng_fec on a machine with a quad ethernet NIC : > >lister> de0: port 0xd000-0xd07f mem > >Our own testing with this card (not using fec ... just traffic on the >4 ports) has determined that it appears to have a 100 megabit limit to >the total of 4 ports on the card. Now... this could be a FreeBSD >driver issue ... or a PCI bus issue, but in all our tests with several >motherboards and many versions of FreeBSD (from 3.2 or so through >about 4.5) we were never able to achieve more than 100 megabit on the >card in total. > >Our application was an NFS server that had 100's of diskless nodes >running from it. We suspected that this could be some interaction >between the speed of the disks (and their pci cost) and the card, so >we isolated the card by doing straight packet tests (no meaningful >data) and still found the card maxxing out at 100 megabit total over >the 4 ports. > >Dave. > > > This might explain why I got it for $50 :) Did you go with another quad that performed better? Some more observations on ng_fec : it _appears_ that it (along with the cisco you plug it into) 'balances' on a 'host per port' basis. It seems geared for a server more than a client. I am trying one2many next ala : http://bsdvault.net/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=98 With similar results. I have a 3com (xl0) and a davicom 9102 (dc0) one2many-ed thus : ifconfig xl0 up ifconfig dc0 up kldload /modules/ng_ether.ko ngctl mkpeer xl0: one2many upper one ngctl connect xl0: xl0:upper lower many0 ngctl connect dc0: xl0:upper lower many1 ngctl msg dc0: setpromisc 1 ngctl msg dc0: setautosrc 0 ngctl msg xl0:upper setconfig "{ xmitAlg=1 failAlg=1 enabledLinks=[ 1 1 ] }" I have an NFS mount to a GB NIC equipt machine with a rocketraid 646 controller and a maxtor ata-133 7200 rpm drive on it. I nfs mount a directory and I still can't crack 100mbs ... :\ The card in the server is an intel pro 1000 : em0: port 0x1800-0x183f mem 0xf0000000-0xf001ffff irq 5 at device 9.0 on pci0 em0: Speed:N/A Duplex:N/A Should I enable polling for the server? I am using 4.11 on all. TIA for any thoughts ...