Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:24:14 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@FreeBSD.org> To: "firmdog@gmail.com" <firmdog@gmail.com> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 7.1-PRERELEASE : bad network performance (nfe0) Message-ID: <20080928222414.GA90269@icarus.home.lan> In-Reply-To: <fa1676af0809281515x64e93d8fs9b2002d83b909f7a@mail.gmail.com> References: <wptzc1gu9v.fsf@heho.snv.jussieu.fr> <fa1676af0809281043k269b3d78sbf1e8006f2aa282e@mail.gmail.com> <20080928205300.GF60230@in-addr.com> <fa1676af0809281515x64e93d8fs9b2002d83b909f7a@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 06:15:43PM -0400, firmdog@gmail.com wrote: > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 01:43:12PM -0400, firmdog@gmail.com wrote: > > > I have the same problem on a Dell Poweredge SC440 when I transferred over > > > 50GB > > > from a FreeBSD 5.4 box to my new Dell running 7.1. Used a crossover > > cable > > > and > > > the link was 1000 full duplex, but could only get about 10M/s. Very odd. > > > Did a > > > tcpdump and saw lots of bad checksum errors. > > > > > > What other troubleshooting steps can we take? What could be the problem? > > > > Please post the first few lines of ifconfig for bge0. I'm suspecting > > you'll see something like > > > > em1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 > > options=1b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING> > > > > (yes, I know thats an em, not bge, but I don't have any bge's around > > here) > > > > Note that the options line say that receive and transmit checksum > > offloading is enabled. This means that for packets transmitted > > by this system, tcpdump will show checksum errors as the kernel > > is not generating the checksums, the ethernet card will. Since > > tcpdump is seeting the packet before the ethernet card does its > > magic, you get the checksum errors on transmit. Received packets > > should be fine though. > > > > Regards, > > > > Gary > > > > > Pasted below. When I was doing the transfer, it was 1000 full duplex and > was very slow. > This is a web/email/database server and I don't see any performance problems > yet, but > I would like to know what the problem is/was. What else can I provide? > > bge0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 > options=9b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM> > ether 00:1a:a0:23:c0:03 > inet 192.168.1.2 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 > media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>) > status: active I see 100baseTX there, not 1000baseTX. This speed is being selected via autoneg (auto speed/duplex negotiation). Whatever switch you're connected to is not properly negotiating the speed. What brand and model of switch is this host connected to, and are you *absolutely certain* it supports (and is configured for) gigE? -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080928222414.GA90269>