Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 09:59:23 -0800 From: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> To: Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ssh None cipher Message-ID: <CAOjFWZ6HXmKtyJ2C3h73StVWV5LYw-mh1-vNqw6UC8uC63BrEg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5442C040.4090200@freebsd.org> References: <CAOc73CCvQqwg65tt9vs54CoU1HGvV7ZxLWeQwXiSOm8UjtV50w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1410172242240.27826@multics.mit.edu> <5441E834.2000906@freebsd.org> <544246E8.1090001@ijs.si> <CAOjFWZ4EndnanZ_oyMeA9bH%2BxxTZ%2BJ8mnJtTdvBjTMYvUsXr2w@mail.gmail.com> <5442C040.4090200@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 2014-10-18 13:21, Freddie Cash wrote: > > On Oct 18, 2014 3:54 AM, "Mark Martinec" <Mark.Martinec+freebsd@ijs.si> > > wrote: > >> > >> If the purpose of having a none cipher is to have a fast > >> file transfer, then one should be using sysutils/bbcp > >> for that purposes. Uses ssd for authentication, and > >> opens unencrypted channel(s) for the actual data transfer. > >> It's also very fast, can use multiple TCP streams. > > > > That's an interesting alternative to rsync, scp, and ftp, but doesn't > help > > with zfs send/recv which is where the none cipher really shines. > > > > Without the none cipher, SSH becomes the bottleneck limiting transfers = to > > around 400 Mbps on a gigabit LAN. With the none cipher, the network > becomes > > the bottleneck limiting transfers to around 920 Mbps on the same gigabi= t > > LAN. > > > > This is between two 8-core AMD Opteron 6200 systems using igb(4) NICs. > > Actually, looking into it, the bbcp command can support a pipe at each > end instead of files, so you can actually do a zfs send | zfs receive > via bbcp, and use multiple concurrent connections, to get around TCP > window stuff when going transatlantic > > I am going to be trying it out shortly. > > Note: the other big improvement in newer ssh is the HPN stuff, that is > switched on since 9.2 I think. =E2=80=8BAfter much finagling and testing, I have managed to incorporate bb= cp into my ZFS send/recv script. And it works much better than regular, encrypted SSH in my setup. Regular SSH transfers tended to top out around 400 Mbps, using 100% of 1 CPU. Was not able to get the multi-threadded AES cipher working. SSH connections using the NONE cipher saturated the gigabit link with minimal CPU usage. And a bbcp connection is currently running between 500-800 Mbps (depending on the size of the snpashot), also with minimal CPU usage. NOTE: I expect this be running much better next week, as the receiving pool is currently resilvering a drive, slowing everything down. Got things working using the following bbcp command format: bbcp -N io "zfs send -I pool/fs@snap1 pool/fs@snap2" username@remotesys:"zf= s recv -d pool" Have not played with any of the myriad tuning options for bbcp. Just wanted to see if I could get it to work, and how an untuned connection compared to an untuned SSH connection (with and without NONE cipher). So far, I'm impressed. =E2=80=8BThanks for the suggestion. It's another tool in the box. :)=E2= =80=8B --=20 Freddie Cash fjwcash@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOjFWZ6HXmKtyJ2C3h73StVWV5LYw-mh1-vNqw6UC8uC63BrEg>