Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:44:23 -0700 From: Michael DeMan <michael@staff.openaccess.org> To: Eivind Hestnes <eivind.hestnes@stabbursmoen.no> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance Intel Pro 1000 MT (PWLA8490MT) Message-ID: <d00578af6eff12d7aa5139bbb410a1d2@staff.openaccess.org> In-Reply-To: <42656CA0.9040403@stabbursmoen.no> References: <20050419183335.F18008131@joshua.stabbursmoen.no> <5c05f1805041911351d2bd98e@mail.gmail.com> <42656CA0.9040403@stabbursmoen.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The rule of thumb I have seen on Intel/UNIX based routers is that you want 1GHz of CPU for every gigabit of throughput. Also, on gigabit NICs, make sure you have a 64-bit PCI bus on the motherboard. Michael F. DeMan Director of Technology OpenAccess Network Services Bellingham, WA 98225 michael@staff.openaccess.org 360-647-0785 On Apr 19, 2005, at 1:40 PM, Eivind Hestnes wrote: > Thanks for the advice. Didn't do any difference, though.. Perhaps I > should try to increase the polling frequency.. > > Jerald Von Dipple wrote: > >> Hey man >> >> You need to bump >> >> kern.polling.burst: 150 >> >> Upto at least 150000 >> >> Regards, >> Jerald Von D. >> >> On 4/19/05, Eivind Hestnes <eivind@stabbursmoen.no> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have an Intel Pro 1000 MT (PWLA8490MT) NIC (em(4) driver 1.7.35) >>> installed >>> in a Pentium III 500 Mhz with 512 MB RAM (100 Mhz) running FreeBSD >>> 5.4-RC3. >>> The machine is routing traffic between multiple VLANs. Recently I >>> did a >>> benchmark with/without device polling enabled. Without device >>> polling I was >>> able to transfer roughly 180 Mbit/s. The router however was >>> suffering when >>> doing this benchmark. Interrupt load was peaking 100% - overall the >>> system >>> itself was quite unusable (_very_ high system load). With device >>> polling >>> enabled the interrupt kept stable around 40-50% and max transfer >>> rate was >>> nearly 70 Mbit/s. Not very scientific tests, but it gave me a pin >>> point. >>> >>> However, a Pentium III in combination with a good NIC should in my >>> opinion >>> be a respectful router.. but I'm not satisfied with the results. The >>> pf >>> ruleset is like nothing, and the kernel is stripped and customized >>> for best >>> performance. >>> >>> Any tweaking tips for making my router perform better? >>> >>> Debug information: >>> eivind@core-gw:~$ sysctl -a | grep kern.polling >>> kern.polling.burst: 150 >>> kern.polling.each_burst: 5 >>> kern.polling.burst_max: 150 >>> kern.polling.idle_poll: 0 >>> kern.polling.poll_in_trap: 0 >>> kern.polling.user_frac: 50 >>> kern.polling.reg_frac: 20 >>> kern.polling.short_ticks: 1411 >>> kern.polling.lost_polls: 720 >>> kern.polling.pending_polls: 0 >>> kern.polling.residual_burst: 0 >>> kern.polling.handlers: 0 >>> kern.polling.enable: 1 >>> kern.polling.phase: 0 >>> kern.polling.suspect: 186 >>> kern.polling.stalled: 0 >>> kern.polling.idlepoll_sleeping: 1 >>> >>> eivind@core-gw:~$ cat /etc/sysctl.conf >>> net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 >>> net.inet.ip.fastforwarding=1 >>> net.inet.carp.preempt=1 >>> kern.polling.enable=1 >>> >>> HZ set to 1000 as recommended in README for the em(4) driver. Driver >>> is of >>> cource compiled into kernel. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Eivind Hestnes >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>> "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>> >>> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d00578af6eff12d7aa5139bbb410a1d2>