From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Apr 1 8:53:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from snapper.lansters.com (21-155-124-64.dsl.lan2wan.com [64.124.155.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E08A37B71A for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2001 08:53:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lucky@lansters.com) Received: from lucky (lucky.lansters.com [10.1.0.2]) by snapper.lansters.com (8.11.2/8.9.3) with SMTP id f31FrV301258 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2001 11:53:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from lucky@lansters.com) From: "Jason T. Luttgens" To: Subject: Network performance question Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 11:53:02 -0400 Message-ID: <000001c0bac3$d6027c10$0200010a@lucky> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi all. I've been doing some network capture performance testing with FreeBSD 4.3 RC vs. Linux 2.2.18 and 2.4.3. Basically I captured a few hours traffic at my local network and I'm using tcpreplay to re-send the packets on the network. Tcpreplay sends the packets out at a rate of 20000 packets/second. I have another computer that is multi-boot where I do a tcpdump to listen to the packets on the network and write them to a file (tcpdump -n -w test) The listening system is a Pentuim III 800, 256MB RAM, 3COM 3C905B-TX net card.... Linux 2.2.18 fails miserably to capture all the packets, and I get a lot of "too much work at interrupt" kernel messages. It only sees about half of the packets. Linux 2.4.3 performs very well - in most cases captures all packets with no interface errors. FreeBSD kinda disappointed me. It gets ~1000 interface errors on about 514000 packets. I switched the 3COM card out for a NetGear FA311 (sis driver). After receiving ~310000 packets, the network goes down (can't ping/telnet anywhere). At that point I have to ifconfig down and up the interface to get it back. Now maybe this method of testing is not proper, or there is something on the FreeBSD box I can tweak - but at this point, I'm inclined to think that Linux 2.4.3 handles high network loads better than FreeBSD. Can someone comment on this? Thanks, Jason To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message