Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 01:48:21 +0000 From: "sepherosa_gmail.com (Sepherosa Ziehau)" <phabric-noreply@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: [Differential] D6689: tcp/lro: Implement hash table for LRO entries. Message-ID: <81a3f0c9e90040e6e1d02e7501166870@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-gqea3nyz45kho6yqfulz-req@FreeBSD.org> References: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-gqea3nyz45kho6yqfulz-req@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
sepherosa_gmail.com added a comment. In https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6689#148473, @sepherosa_gmail.com wrote: > In https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6689#148252, @rrs wrote: > > > These look fine and familiar ;-) > > > > I think a hash table as an option to sorting is probably a good thing :D > > > Yeah, and I got pretty exiting performance improvement and noticeable latency reduction with both methods in Azure for nginx 1KB~40KB web objects and 4/14 reqs/conn :)). I will post the result once 128/256 mbuf queue depth for sorting method is done (512/1024/2048/4096 have been completed so far). If you are interested, I have the measurement result posted here: results <https://people.freebsd.org/~sephe/lro_pic/>; For nginx workload, both latency and performance are measured. As you can see both performance and latency got improved, almost for all nginx workloads we have tested so far. Both methods provide significant improvement for some kinds of workload: 1KB obj 14reqs/conn <https://people.freebsd.org/~sephe/lro_pic/1K_14.png>; 8KB obj 14reqs/conn <https://people.freebsd.org/~sephe/lro_pic/8K_14.png>; REVISION DETAIL https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6689 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: sepherosa_gmail.com, glebius, gnn, bz, rwatson, gallatin, hselasky, #transport, rrs Cc: freebsd-net-list
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?81a3f0c9e90040e6e1d02e7501166870>