Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 00:31:30 +0100 From: Emanuel Strobl <Emanuel.Strobl@gmx.net> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: serious networking (em) performance (ggate and NFS) problem Message-ID: <200411180031.36222.Emanuel.Strobl@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <1100733439.21798.36.camel@server.mcneil.com> References: <200411172357.47735.Emanuel.Strobl@gmx.net> <1100733439.21798.36.camel@server.mcneil.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart1261566.XGPEXi19aq Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Am Donnerstag, 18. November 2004 00:17 schrieb Sean McNeil: > On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 23:57 +0100, Emanuel Strobl wrote: > > Dear best guys, > > > > I really love 5.3 in many ways but here're some unbelievable transfer > > rates, after I went out and bought a pair of Intel GigaBit Ethernet Car= ds > > to solve my performance problem (*laugh*): > > > > (In short, see *** below) [...] > > Conclusion: > > > > *** > > > > - It seems that GEOM_GATE is less efficient with GigaBit (em) than NFS > > via TCP is. > > > > - em seems to have problems with MTU greater than 1500 > > > > - UDP seems to have performance disadvantages over TCP regarding NFS > > which should be vice versa AFAIK > > > > - polling and em (GbE) with HZ=3D256 is definitly no good idea, even > > 10Base-2 can compete > > > > - NFS over TCP with MTU of 16114 gives the maximum transferrate for lar= ge > > files over GigaBit Ethernet with a value of 17MB/s, a quarter of what I= 'd > > expect with my test equipment. > > > > - overall network performance (regarding large file transfers) is > > horrible > > > > Please, if anybody has the knowledge to dig into these problems, let me > > know if I can do any tests to help getting ggate and NFS useful in fast > > 5.3-stable environments. > > I am very interested in this as I have similar issues with the re > driver. It it horrible when operating at gigE vs. 100BT. Have you > tried plugging the machines into a 100BT instead? No, because I observed similar bad performance with my fileserver which is= =20 almost the same HW and it's em (Intel GbE) is connected to the local=20 100baseTX segment. I explicitly avoided to go via any switch/hub to eliminate further problems. I wonder if anybody has ever been able to transfer more than 17MB/s via IP= =20 anyway? I need this performance for mirroring via ggate, so I'm thinking about fwe = (IP=20 over Firewire). Perhaps somebody has tried this already? If fwe gives reasonable transferra= tes=20 I guess the perfomance problem won't be found in ethernet but in IP. Thanks, =2DHarry > > Cheers, > Sean --nextPart1261566.XGPEXi19aq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBm99YBylq0S4AzzwRAq2/AKCABpOjptOKVBd0nLKr0SO/R7UZiQCfe+m+ vtc5HdRy4JiesX3TYF6aSbk= =kjFa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1261566.XGPEXi19aq--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200411180031.36222.Emanuel.Strobl>