Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 19:17:01 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Flaschberger <if@xip.at> To: Steve Bertrand <steve@ibctech.ca> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Paul <paul@gtcomm.net> Subject: Re: Freebsd IP Forwarding performance (question, and some info) [7-stable, current, em, smp] Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807031913130.9569@filebunker.xip.at> In-Reply-To: <486D011A.7080406@ibctech.ca> References: <4867420D.7090406@gtcomm.net> <20080701004346.GA3898@stlux503.dsto.defence.gov.au> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807010257570.19444@filebunker.xip.at> <20080701010716.GF3898@stlux503.dsto.defence.gov.au> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807010308320.19444@filebunker.xip.at> <486986D9.3000607@monkeybrains.net> <48699960.9070100@gtcomm.net> <ea7b9c170806302005n2a66f592h2127f87a0ba2c6d2@mail.gmail.com> <20080701033117.GH83626@cdnetworks.co.kr> <ea7b9c170806302050p2a3a5480t29923a4ac2d7c852@mail.gmail.com> <4869ACFC.5020205@gtcomm.net> <4869B025.9080006@gtcomm.net> <486A7E45.3030902@gtcomm.net> <486A8F24.5010000@gtcomm.net> <486A9A0E.6060308@elischer.org> <486B41D5.3060609@gtcomm.net> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807021052041.557@filebunker.xip.at> <486C7611.9030905@gtcomm.net> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807031248250.9569@filebunker.xip.at> <486CCB6A.6070104@ibctech.ca> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807031455080.9569@filebunker.xip.at> <486D011A.7080406@ibctech.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dear Steve, >>>> My next "router" appliance will be: >>>> http://www.axiomtek.com.tw/products/ViewProduct.asp?view=429 >>> >>> This is exactly the device that I have been testing with (just rebranded). >> >> cool. >> what performace do you reach? > > After some very quick testing with everything default, I am witnessing > results that are far below what I would have expected. I have a few > questions: > > - how do I identify if polling on an interface is enabled? I see no > difference with ifconfig output em0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 options=5b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,POLLING> <--- ether 00:90:0b:08:d7:90 media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX <full-duplex>) status: active kern.polling.reg_frac=20 kern.polling.user_frac=20 kern.polling.burst_max=512 man polling polling does not help to get more pps, but prevent locks and preserve some %cpu for other tasks (routing daemons,..) > - do I need to compile a new kernel to be able to enable/disable polling? options DEVICE_POLLING you need this in kern-conf. > - without moving some hardware around, I only have a single box connected to > a router, and I've been testing from that box to a different interface within > the router. Will the test results be optimal if I ping all the way through > the router to a second device connected to it? use any other packet generator. linux has one in kernel, and there are moch more. (iperf,...) ping uses a lot of cpu. > - how are the results affected when generating and receiving the test packets > within the router itself (as opposed to using outside devices)? thats no real "pps" forwarding performance over the network cards. Kind regards, Ingo Flaschberger
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LFD.1.10.0807031913130.9569>