Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 19:10:40 -0400 From: Paul <paul@gtcomm.net> To: Bart Van Kerckhove <bart@it-ss.be> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Ingo Flaschberger <if@xip.at> Subject: Re: Freebsd IP Forwarding performance (question, and some info) [7-stable, current, em, smp] Message-ID: <486FFF70.3090402@gtcomm.net> In-Reply-To: <2d3001c8def1$f4309b90$020b000a@bartwrkstxp> References: <4867420D.7090406@gtcomm.net> <48699960.9070100@gtcomm.net><ea7b9c170806302005n2a66f592h2127f87a0ba2c6d2@mail.gmail.com><20080701033117.GH83626@cdnetworks.co.kr><ea7b9c170806302050p2a3a5480t29923a4ac2d7c852@mail.gmail.com><4869ACFC.5020205@gtcomm.net> <4869B025.9080006@gtcomm.net><486A7E45.3030902@gtcomm.net> <486A8F24.5010000@gtcomm.net><486A9A0E.6060308@elischer.org> <486B41D5.3060609@gtcomm.net><alpine.LFD.1.10.0807021052041.557@filebunker.xip.at><486B4F11.6040906@gtcomm.net><alpine.LFD.1.10.0807021155280.557@filebunker.xip.at><486BC7F5.5070604@gtcomm.net><20080703160540.W6369@delplex.bde.org><486C7F93.7010308@gtcomm.net><20080703195521.O6973@delplex.bde.org><486D35A0.4000302@gtcomm.net><alpine.LFD.1.10.0807041106591.19613@filebunker.xip.at><486DF1A3.9000409@gtcomm.net><alpine.LFD.1.10.0807041303490.20760@filebunker.xip.at><486E65E6.3060301@gtcomm.net> <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807052356130.2145@filebunker.xip.at> <2d3001c8def1$f4309b90$020b000a@bartwrkstxp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
ULE + PREEMPTION for non SMP no major differences with SMP with ULE/4BSD and preemption ON/OFF 32 bit UP test coming up with new cpu and I'm installing dragonfly sometime this weekend :] UP: 1mpps in one direction with no firewall/no routing table is not too bad, but 1mpps both directions is the goal here 700kpps with full bgp table in one direction is not too bad Ipfw needs a lot of work, barely gets 500kpps with no routing table with a few ipfw rules loaded.. that's horrible Linux barely takes a hit when you start loading iptables rules , but then again linux has a HUGE problem with routing random packet sources/ports .. grr My problem Is I need some box to do fast routing and some to do firewall.. :/ I'll have 32 bit 7-stable UP test with ipfw/routing table and then move on to dragonfly. I'll post the dragonfly results here as well as sign up for their mailing list. Bart Van Kerckhove wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Paul / Ingo, > >>> I tried all of this :/ still, 256/512 descriptors seem to work the >>> best. Happy to let you log into the machine and fiddle around if you >>> want :) >>> > I've been watching this thread closely, since I'm in a very similair > situation. > A few questions/remarks: > > Does ULE provide better performance than 4BSD for forwarding? > Did you try freebsd4 as well? This thread had a report about that quite > opposite to my own experiences, -4 seemed to be a lot faster at forwarding > than anything else I 've tried so far. > Obviously the thing I'm interested in is IMIX - and 64byte packets. > Does anyone have any benchmarks for DragonFly? I asked around on IRC, but > that nor google turned up any useful results. > > <snip> > >> I don't think you will be able to route 64byte packets at 1gbit >> wirespeed (2Mpps) with a current x86 platform. >> > Are there actual hardware related reasons this should not be possible, or > is this purely lack of dedicated work towards this goal? > > <snip> > >> Theres a "sun" used at quagga dev as bgp-route-server. >> http://quagga.net/route-server.php >> (but they don't answered my question regarding fw-performance). >> > > > the Quagga guys are running a sun T1000 (niagara 1) route server - I happen > to have the machine in my racks, > please let me know if you want to run some tests on it, I'm sure they won't > mind ;-) > It should also make a great testbed for SMP performance testing imho (and > they're pretty cheap these days) > Also, feel free to use me as a relay for your questions, they're not always > very reachable. > <snap> > > >> Perhaps you have some better luck at some different hardware systems >> (ppc, mips, ..?) or use freebsd only for routing-table-updates and >> special network-cards (netfpga) for real routing. >> > The netfpga site seems more or less dead - is this project still alive? > It does look like a very interesting idea, even though it's currently quite > linux-centric (and according to docs doesn't have VLAN nor ip6 support, the > former being quite a dealbreaker) > > Paul: I'm looking forward to the C2D 32bit benchmarks (maybe throw in a > freebsd4 and/or dragonfly bench if you can..) - appreciate the lots of > information you are providing us :) > > Met vriendelijke groet / With kind regards, > > Bart Van Kerckhove > http://friet.net/pgp.txt > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQA/AwUBSG/tMgoIFchBM0BKEQKUSQCcCJqsw2wtUX7HQi050HEDYX3WPuMAnjmi > eca31f7WQ/oXq9tJ8TEDN3CA > =YGYq > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?486FFF70.3090402>