Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 4 Nov 1997 15:41:17 -0500 (EST)
From:      Charles Henrich <henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu>
To:        Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: de0 errors
Message-ID:  <199711042041.PAA00471@crh.cl.msu.edu>
References:  <63m1kg$gii$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In lists.freebsd.hackers you write:

>On Nov 3,  5:15pm, Simon Shapiro wrote:
>} Subject: Re: de0 errors
>} 
>} Hi Don Lewis;  On 04-Nov-97 you wrote: 
>} 
>} ...
>} 
>} >  } Humm, tcpblast shows 4.0MB/sec.  Granted this isnt an empty net
>} >  either, fairly
>} >  } busy I would imagine.  
>} >  
>} >  That's probably a reasonable number for a 10Mb network, but not a
>} >  100Mb network.  BTW, I bet this NIC is also hurting your disk I/O
>} >  throughput since it is hogging the PCI bus because it's using an
>} >  inefficient transfer method.
>} 
>} I must be missing something.  4MB/sec. on TCP/IP over Ethernet is on a good
>} day, more than 40MHz.  No?

>You're not missing anything, I slipped a decimal point.  Sigh ...

>BTW, I just did some quick calculations and a 21140 + 440FX might still
>be able to drive the network at full speed without running out of PCI
>bandwidth.  It's just that if you're transmitting, you'll consume about
>4x the transmit bandwidth on the PCI bus.  If you're able to send at
>10MB/sec, then you'll consume about 40MB/sec on the PCI bus out of the
>theoretical 132MB/sec.

Im thinking of finding an Intel EtherExpress 100B card to see how that guy
will do.  I also am handling easily 20 articles/sec out of news on this
system, along with 100+ readers, at a load average of about .8, so Im not
grumping :)

-Crh
-- 

       Charles Henrich     Michigan State University     henrich@msu.edu

                         http://pilot.msu.edu/~henrich



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199711042041.PAA00471>