Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 00:52:53 +0200 From: "Bart Van Kerckhove" <bart@it-ss.be> To: "Ingo Flaschberger" <if@xip.at>, "Paul" <paul@gtcomm.net> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Freebsd IP Forwarding performance (question, and some info) [7-stable, current, em, smp] Message-ID: <2d3001c8def1$f4309b90$020b000a@bartwrkstxp> References: <4867420D.7090406@gtcomm.net> <486986D9.3000607@monkeybrains.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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----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?2d3001c8def1$f4309b90$020b000a>