All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: starlight@binnacle.cx
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: big picture UDP/IP performance question re 2.6.18 -> 2.6.32
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 20:40:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111001184049.GE18690@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20111001141002.05af4b20@binnacle.cx>

On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 02:16:05PM -0400, starlight@binnacle.cx wrote:
> At 08:44 AM 10/1/2011 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >In my experience, I have the exact opposite :
> >performance greatly improved in recent
> >kernels. Unless you compile your kernel to include
> >new features that might reduce performance
> >(namespaces, cgroup, ...)
> 
> RH has both of the above turned on in the
> 2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.x86_64 kernel tested.
> 
> If these are big negatives to network
> performance, could you list what should
> specifically turned off to maximize
> results?  Also a recommendation for
> the best recent kernel for another
> benchmark would be helpful.
> 
> Probably can't convince anyone to deploy a
> kernel without commercial support, but if
> an alternate compile fixes performance it
> might be possible to convince RH to support
> the alternative build.

Just a suggestion, instead of measuring CPU usage at a
given load, could you check what maximal load you can
achieve ? It is very possible that CPU usage report is
not accurate. We observed this in a number of situations,
especially in high packet rate environments where the
usage is a sum of many micro-measurements.

Also, I did not notice any indication on the load level
you were reaching (packets per second and bandwidth).
Have you compared the interrupt rate ? It is possible
that they differ between the two kernels, for instance
because the NIC auto-adapts instead of being throttled
to a given rate. This can have a significant impact on
measurements and performance.

Regards,
Willy


  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-01 18:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-01 18:16 big picture UDP/IP performance question re 2.6.18 -> 2.6.32 starlight
2011-10-01 18:40 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2011-10-01 19:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-01 19:43   ` starlight
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-10-07  3:27 starlight
2011-10-07  3:27 ` starlight
2011-10-07  5:40 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-07  6:13   ` starlight
2011-10-07  6:13     ` starlight
2011-10-07 18:09     ` chetan loke
     [not found]       ` <CAAsGZS4s1wTWW1j7FRUWW9jqpPUVF3Q46AMa7+njvE1ckX0Snw @mail.gmail.com>
2011-10-07 18:37         ` starlight
2011-10-07 19:27           ` chetan loke
     [not found]             ` <CAAsGZS4b2F9N3nV3TNu5xG+=2d0L0ncste4xv2vqoVFb1pOxEw @mail.gmail.com>
2011-10-07 19:41               ` starlight
2011-10-07 20:07           ` Ben Hutchings
2011-10-11 16:24   ` Chris Friesen
2011-10-07  2:33 starlight
2011-10-07  2:33 ` starlight
2011-10-07  2:24 starlight
2011-10-07  2:24 ` starlight
2011-10-05  6:58 starlight
2011-10-05  8:53 ` Eric Dumazet
     [not found]   ` <1317804832.2473.25.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pr o-SFF-PC>
2011-10-05 11:50     ` starlight
2011-10-05  6:11 starlight
2011-10-05  3:35 starlight
2011-10-03 18:02 starlight
2011-10-05  6:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-03 15:25 starlight
2011-10-03 16:16 ` Eric Dumazet
     [not found]   ` <1317658588.2442.5.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro -SFF-PC>
2011-10-03 16:28     ` starlight
2011-10-04 19:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-10-04 19:38   ` Joe Perches
2011-10-04 19:42     ` Christoph Lameter
2011-10-04 19:49       ` Serge Belyshev
2011-10-04 20:03         ` Christoph Lameter
2011-10-04 20:12           ` Serge Belyshev
2011-10-04 22:32             ` Con Kolivas
2011-10-04 19:45     ` starlight
2011-10-04 19:45       ` starlight
2011-10-05 13:22   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-05 14:26     ` Christoph Lameter
2011-10-05 15:12       ` Andi Kleen
2011-10-05 15:33       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-05 15:12     ` starlight
2011-10-05 15:12       ` starlight
2011-10-02  5:33 starlight
2011-10-02  7:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-02  8:03   ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-02 14:47   ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-10-02 15:06   ` starlight
2011-10-04 19:54     ` Loke, Chetan
2011-10-01 21:13 starlight
2011-10-01  5:30 starlight
2011-10-01  6:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-01 15:56   ` starlight

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20111001184049.GE18690@1wt.eu \
    --to=w@1wt.eu \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=starlight@binnacle.cx \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.