Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:49:27 +0200 From: Alban Hertroys <haramrae@gmail.com> To: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> Cc: Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>, FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ix(intel) vs mlxen(mellanox) 10Gb performance Message-ID: <CAF-3MvM8-%2BKxP3xr4vF2=c7o4vqCRdPkzQWjHLECzf3Jx8sqxw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20150817113923.GK1872@zxy.spb.ru> References: <1D52028A-B39F-4F9B-BD38-CB1D73BF5D56@cs.huji.ac.il> <20150817094145.GB3158@zxy.spb.ru> <197995E2-0C11-43A2-AB30-FBB0FB8CE2C5@cs.huji.ac.il> <20150817113923.GK1872@zxy.spb.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 17 August 2015 at 13:39, Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> wrote: > In any case, for 10Gb expect about 1200MGB/s. Your usage of units is confusing. Above you claim you expect 1200 million gigabytes per second, or 1.2 * 10^18 Bytes/s. I don't think any known network interface can do that, including highly experimental ones. I suspect you intended to claim that you expect 1.2GB/s (Gigabytes per second) over that 10Gb/s (Gigabits per second) network. That's still on the high side of what's possible. On TCP/IP there is some TCP overhead, so 1.0 GB/s is probably more realistic. WRT the actual problem you're trying to solve, I'm no help there. -- If you can't see the forest for the trees, Cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF-3MvM8-%2BKxP3xr4vF2=c7o4vqCRdPkzQWjHLECzf3Jx8sqxw>