From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Greear Subject: Re: SCTP performance? Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 17:04:59 -0700 Message-ID: <520583AB.9030509@candelatech.com> References: <52057734.6060306@candelatech.com> <1376090518.20509.14.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:37418 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031651Ab3HJAFB (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Aug 2013 20:05:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1376090518.20509.14.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 08/09/2013 04:21 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 16:11 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >> I just added some support for SCTP to my traffic-generator tool. >> >> I tried to send 1Gbps of traffic, bi-directional, across two >> 10G interfaces. TCP does this without any trouble at all, >> but SCTP was asymetric and never got above around 700Mbps, >> and was usually stuck at < 500Mbps. >> >> perf top didn't show any obvious CPU bottlenecks. >> >> Has anyone done any recent performance testing with SCTP? >> >> I'd be interested to know the results if so... > > You mean there is no SCTP offload on the NIC and/or GRO, yes that's too > bad. > I'm sure that is part of the problem. I got much better results when I explicitly set the tx/rx socket buffer sizes to 2MB, so maybe it just sucks at auto-tuning it's socket buffer sizes. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com