From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 11 18:26:32 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0D181065893 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:26:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tundra@tundraware.com) Received: from ozzie.tundraware.com (ozzie.tundraware.com [75.145.138.73]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63A38FC0A for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:26:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [0.0.0.0] (ozzie.tundraware.com [75.145.138.73]) (authenticated bits=0) by ozzie.tundraware.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p3BI6fcs015984 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:06:41 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from tundra@tundraware.com) Message-ID: <4DA34331.7000202@tundraware.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:06:41 -0500 From: Tim Daneliuk Organization: TundraWare Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Denny Schierz References: <1302516039.3223.222.camel@pcdenny> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (ozzie.tundraware.com [75.145.138.73]); Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:06:41 -0500 (CDT) X-TundraWare-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-TundraWare-MailScanner-ID: p3BI6fcs015984 X-TundraWare-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-TundraWare-MailScanner-From: tundra@tundraware.com X-Spam-Status: No Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re=3A_Network_throughput=3A_Never_get_more_than_1?= =?iso-8859-1?q?12MB/s_=FCber_two_NICs?= X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:26:32 -0000 On 4/11/2011 12:55 PM, Denny Schierz said this: > > Am 11.04.2011 um 16:20 schrieb Michael Loftis: > >> Most switches load balance based on MAC addresses, not IP, unless it >> is routing the traffic as a Layer 3 switch then you can enable IP >> based load balancing in some of those. Also you might simply be > > that was the reason, why we disabled the loadbalancer and tested with plain NICs. > >> reaching the limits of your firewall box too you haven't mentioned any >> of it's specs, nor do you seem to have run top while running the iperf >> tests. > > The clients (who running iperf -c ) had a load near zero, they are powerful machines (Sun sparcs) with 8 cores and more. The machine, with 4 Cores (Xeon) who is running "iperf -s", had a load round about ~0.8. > > No firewall etc. between the hosts, just plain network :-) > > cu denny_______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > Are you certain you are not somehow running active-passive instead of active-active ... just a thought... -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tim Daneliuk tundra@tundraware.com