From owner-freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 10 23:50:38 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D771F37A for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 23:50:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.sbone.de (bird.sbone.de [46.4.1.90]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx1.sbone.de", Issuer "SBone.DE" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BAF42449 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 23:50:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.sbone.de (mail.sbone.de [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:587]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA9D625D3815; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 23:50:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from content-filter.sbone.de (content-filter.sbone.de [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:2742]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9655CC22BA7; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 23:50:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sbone.de Received: from mail.sbone.de ([IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:587]) by content-filter.sbone.de (content-filter.sbone.de [fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:2742]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cwOUgyi3-T9V; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 23:50:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:4410:4fa:4b84:1f36:739f] (unknown [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:4410:4fa:4b84:1f36:739f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8B07CC22B9F; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 23:50:22 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) Subject: Re: VNET performance From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 23:50:03 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <221F8CBD-0763-4457-A587-948E887FAD17@lists.zabbadoz.net> References: To: Clint Armstrong X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2) Cc: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 23:50:38 -0000 On 10 Jul 2014, at 20:45 , Clint Armstrong = wrote: > What is the expected network performance of a VNET jail for network > communication between the jail and the host, or between multiple = jails? I > expected it to approach the 10Gbps of the epair device, but I'm not = seeing > that. >=20 > I see between 800 - 1200 Mbps in standard iperf tests both between the = host > bridge interface and the vnet jail inteface. I see the same poor = speeds if > I make 2 vnet jails and put one side of the epair in each and test = between > them. >=20 > Is the overhead of vnet causing this? Is there anything I can do to = improve > this performance. >=20 > I=92ve tested and seen similar performance on 10.0-RELEASE and = 11.0-CURRENT. epair has a netisr queuing in between as you cannot call the input = routines directly from the output routines. I was able to get a bit = more traffic through by doing pinning games. I wonder what a vale switch for vnets could achieve. =97=20 Bjoern A. Zeeb "Come on. Learn, goddamn it.", WarGames, 1983