Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 18:04:18 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Zaphod Beeblebrox <zbeeble@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Disappointed-new Message-ID: <20060410080418.GB739@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <5f67a8c40604091456gfef47d3q3583d3d1a519d035@mail.gmail.com> References: <20060407121452.GO1784@math.jussieu.fr> <6.2.3.4.0.20060408150025.099369a8@64.7.153.2> <5f67a8c40604091456gfef47d3q3583d3d1a519d035@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2006-Apr-09 17:56:51 -0400, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote: >If you have a dual-em card in this server, you should get better performance >putting your primary load out the em interface(s). In general, we've >benched the em (and to a lesser extent, the fxp) interfaces as performing >much better than other ethernets (especially bge). I have a bge on my >laptop --- and for the most part I don't have problems --- but I wouldn't >put bge's in my servers and if they come with them on the motherboard, I >don't use them. <metoo> I can't comment on gigabit performance but at Fast Ethernet speeds, I've found that fxp performs much better than dc, tl and tx NICs. I've had fairly bad experiences with bge under even moderate load (though the one in my laptop seems OK). </metoo> -- Peter Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060410080418.GB739>