From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: ralph+d@istop.com
Cc: "netdev@oss.sgi.com" <netdev@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: Linux router performance (3c59x) (fwd)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 22:30:47 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E76BD17.7060208@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.51.0303172356440.8302@ns.istop.com>
Ralph Doncaster wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Ben Greear wrote:
>
>
>>Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>Currently the box in question is running a 67% system load with ~40kpps.
>>>Here's the switch port stats that the 2 3c905cx cards are plugged into:
>>>
>>> 5 minute input rate 36143000 bits/sec, 8914 packets/sec
>>> 5 minute output rate 54338000 bits/sec, 10722 packets/sec
>>>-
>>> 5 minute input rate 50585000 bits/sec, 12445 packets/sec
>>> 5 minute output rate 34326000 bits/sec, 9596 packets/sec
>>
>>When using larger packets, NAPI doesn't have much effect.
>
>
> So I should just give up on Linux and go with FreeBSD?
> http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/polling/
It would be interesting to see a performance comparison.
>>Have you tried routing with simple routing tables to see if that
>>speeds anything up?
>
> No, but I did read through a bunch of the route-cache code and even with
> the dynamic hashtable size introduced in recent 2.4 revs, it looks very
> ineficient for core routing. I'd expect a speedup with a small routing
> table, but then it would be useless as a core router in my network.
So, if making the routing table smaller 'fixes' things, then NAPI and your
NIC is not the problem.
>>Could also try an e100 or Tulip NIC. Those usually work pretty
>>good... Or, could use an e1000 GigE NIC...
>
>
> If I can get confirmation that under similar conditions the e1000 performs
> significantly better, then I'll go that route.
In my testing, I could get about 140kpps (64-byte packets) tx or
rx on a single port. Bi-directional I got about 90kpps. This
was a 1.8Ghz AMD processor with a tulip driver.
When using MTU sized packets, could fill 4 ports with tx+rx traffic
at 90+Mbps.
With e1000 on a 64/66 PCI bus, I could transmit around 860Mbps with 1500
byte packets (tx + rx on the same machine, but different ports of
a dual-port NIC), and could generate maybe 400kpps
with small packets (I don't remember the exact number here...)
This was using a slightly modified (and slower) pktgen module, which is standard in
the latest kernels.
So, sending/receiving packets at extreme rates is possible. Routing with 100k entries
may not work nearly so well.
>>It's also possible that you are just reaching the limit of your
>>system.
>
>
> The NAPI docs imply 144kpps is easily attainable on lesser hardware than
> mine. Also I can't see bandwidth being the issue as I'm moving
> <25Mbytes/sec over the PCI bus. I should be able to do more than double
> that before I have to worry about PCI saturation.
So, test w/smaller routing tables so you can see if it's routing or the NIC
that is slowing you down.
>
> -Ralph
>
--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com>
President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-18 6:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-18 3:43 Linux router performance (3c59x) (fwd) Ralph Doncaster
2003-03-18 4:48 ` Ben Greear
2003-03-18 5:09 ` Ralph Doncaster
2003-03-18 6:30 ` Ben Greear [this message]
2003-03-18 9:54 ` Robert Olsson
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=3E76BD17.7060208@candelatech.com \
--to=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=ralph+d@istop.com \
/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.