From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 23 07:32:32 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: net@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F12916A41F for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2005 07:32:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.sick.ru (cell.sick.ru [217.72.144.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7144B43D45 for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2005 07:32:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.sick.ru (glebius@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.sick.ru (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j9N7WTEI039828 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 23 Oct 2005 11:32:30 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.sick.ru (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id j9N7WT5h039827; Sun, 23 Oct 2005 11:32:29 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.sick.ru: glebius set sender to glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 11:32:29 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: Michael VInce Message-ID: <20051023073229.GT59364@cell.sick.ru> References: <20051020140200.GL59364@cell.sick.ru> <4359FFE3.7060001@roq.com> <20051022091905.GH59364@cell.sick.ru> <435B3A92.1040600@roq.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <435B3A92.1040600@roq.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Cc: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: em(4) patch for test X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 07:32:32 -0000 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