Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 11:32:29 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Michael VInce <mv@roq.com> Cc: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: em(4) patch for test Message-ID: <20051023073229.GT59364@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <435B3A92.1040600@roq.com> References: <20051020140200.GL59364@cell.sick.ru> <4359FFE3.7060001@roq.com> <20051022091905.GH59364@cell.sick.ru> <435B3A92.1040600@roq.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 05:24:02PM +1000, Michael VInce wrote: M> Here is my second round of my non scientific benchmarking and tests, I M> hope this is useful. M> I been having fun benchmarking these machines but I am starting to get M> sick of it as well :) but I find it important to know that things are M> going to work right when they are launched to do their real work. M> M> The final results look good after patching and running ab tests I was M> unable to get errors out of netstat -i output, even when grilling the M> server-C machine to a rather high load. Again big thanks! I must note that increased speed in your test isn't a luck. If we get rid of errors, that are lost packets, surely TCP speed will increase. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051023073229.GT59364>