From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 15 09:34:20 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2A1C106566C for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:34:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de) Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de [130.133.4.66]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B75A8FC14 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:34:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) with esmtp (envelope-from ) id <1MyMiw-0006g4-T9>; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:34:18 +0200 Received: from telesto.geoinf.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.86.198]) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) with esmtpsa (envelope-from ) id <1MyMiw-00053y-QG>; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:34:18 +0200 Message-ID: <4AD6ECAB.4050906@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:34:35 +0000 From: "O. Hartmann" Organization: Freie =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Universit=E4t_Berlin?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090824) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hongtao Yin References: <78DB4AE8EF5F4A1EBD3992D7404B2725@china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <78DB4AE8EF5F4A1EBD3992D7404B2725@china.huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: 130.133.86.198 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Comparison of FreeBSD/Linux TCP Throughput performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:34:20 -0000 Hongtao Yin wrote: > Hi, > > > > I compared TCP performance between FreeBSD and Linux by running test tools > Netperf and Iperf with Intel NIC. > > The kernels are full version and default values are used in the testing > except TCP Congestion Control algorithm set to Reno. > >>From the test results we can see Linux TCP performance in throughput is > better than FreeBSD. The worst case (send msg size 128) shows that FreeBSD > throughput is only 43% of Linux's. > > > > I like to get some feedback if anyone did similar comparison test, or knows > any issues with kernels or drivers. Thanks lot. > > > > FreeBSD and Linux Sysctl captures are attached for reference. > > > > Regards, > > Hongtao > > > > > > > > Test Environments: > > PC: Dell Precision T3400 (same 4 PCs) > > CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E4600@2.4Ghz > > FreeBSD: V7.1 (full version) (TCP CC: newReno) > > Linux: V2.6.31.1 (full version) (TCP CC: Reno) > > Ethernet card: Intel Pro/1000 PWLA8492 MT Dual Port Server Adapter (Gigabit) > chip 82546EB (only one port used for each PC) > > Switch: Netgear ProSafe 8 port Gigabit Switch (model GS108) > > Iperf: V2.0.4 > > Netperf: V2.4.4 > > > > Setup: > > > > > > ---------- > > | switch | > > ---------- > > ---------------------| | | |-------------------- > > | | | | > > | --------| |-------- | > > | | | | > > | | | | > > -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- > > | PC1 | | PC2 | | PC3 | | PC4 | > > | FreeBSD | | FreeBSD | | Linux | | Linux | > > |192.168.1.10| |192.168.1.20| |192.168.1.30| |192.168.1.40| > > -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > ================================ > > Netperf Test Results > > ================================ > > > > TCP Throughput Test > > ------------------- > > > > PC2/4: #netserver -p 22113 > > PC1/3: #netperf -H 192.168.1.20 -p 22113 -l 10 > > > > Recv Send Send Elapsed > Throughput > > Socket Socket Message Time > 10^6 bits/sec > > Size Size Size Sec. > > bytes bytes bytes > > FreeBSD: 65536 32768 32768 10.34 > 598.11 > > Linux: 87380 16384 16384 10.04 > 779.02 > > > > > > PC1/3: #netperf -t TCP_STREAM -H 192.168.1.20 -p 22113 -- -m > 64/128/256/512/1024/2048/4096 > > > > Recv Send Send Elapsed > Throughput > > Socket Socket Message Time > 10^6 bits/sec > > Size Size Size Sec. > > bytes bytes bytes > > FreeBSD: 65536 32768 64 10.19 > 417.10 > > 65536 32768 128 10.35 > 336.63 > > 65536 32768 256 10.36 > 576.99 > > 65536 32768 512 10.35 > 569.79 > > 65536 32768 1024 10.35 > 553.70 > > 65536 32768 2048 10.35 > 584.20 > > 65536 32768 4096 10.35 > 602.45 > > > > Linux: 87380 16384 64 10.03 > 778.21 > > 87380 16384 128 10.03 > 779.72 > > 87380 16384 256 10.04 > 780.16 > > 87380 16384 512 10.03 > 776.85 > > 87380 16384 1024 10.04 > 777.52 > > 87380 16384 2048 10.04 > 777.83 > > 87380 16384 4096 10.03 > 780.17 > > > > > > > > > > =============================== > > Iperf Test Results > > =============================== > > > > Bandwidth Test > > -------------- > > > > PC2/4: #iperf -s > > PC1/3: #iperf -c 192.168.1.20 > > > > Interval Transfer Bandwidth > > sec MBytes Mbits/sec > > FreeBSD: 0.0-10.3 740 600 > > Linux: 0.0-10.0 972 815 > > > > > > PC1/3: #iperf -c 192.168.1.20 -d > > > > Interval Transfer Bandwidth > > sec MBytes Mbits/sec > > FreeBSD: 0.0-10.0 402 337 > > 0.0-10.0 404 338 > > > > Linux: 0.0-10.0 926 776 > > 0.0-10.0 44.1 36.9 > > > > > > Parallel Test > > ------------- > > > > PC2/4: #iperf -s > > PC1/3: #iperf -c 192.168.1.20 -P 2 > > > > Interval Transfer Bandwidth > > sec MBytes Mbits/sec > > FreeBSD: 0.0-10.3 370 300 > > 0.0-10.3 370 300 > > SUM: 0.0-10.3 739 600 > > > > Linux: 0.0-10.0 479 402 > > 0.0-10.0 473 396 > > SUM: 0.0-10.0 952 797 > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" FreeBSD 7.1 is quite old compared to Linux 2.6.31 - I'd like to see at least FreeBSD 7.2 compared, if not 8.0-RC1. Maybe also the most recent FreeBSD 4 should be taken into this test.