From: Olaf Kirch <okir@suse.de>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@sunset.davemloft.net,
kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.19-rc1: Volanomark slowdown
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 23:10:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061108221028.GA16889@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1163011132.10806.189.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:38:52AM -0800, Tim Chen wrote:
> The patch in question affects purely TCP and not the scheduler. I don't
I know.
> think the scheduler has anything to do with the slowdown seen after
> the patch is applied.
In fixing performance issues, the most obvious explanation isn't always
the right one. It's quite possible you're right, sure.
What I'm saying though is that it doesn't rhyme with what I've seen of
Volanomark - we ran 2.6.16 on a 4p Intel box for instance and it didn't
come close to saturating a Gigabit pipe before it maxed out on CPU load.
> The total number of messages being exchanged around the chatrooms in
> Volanomark remain unchanged. But ACKS increase by 3.5 times and
> segments received increase by 38% from netstat.
> So I think it is reasonable to conclude that the increase in TCP traffic
> reduce the bandwidth and throughput in Volanomark.
You could count the number of outbound packets dropped on the server.
Olaf
--
Walks like a duck. Quacks like a duck. Must be a chicken.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-08 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1162924354.10806.172.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2006-11-07 20:45 ` 2.6.19-rc1: Volanomark slowdown David Miller
2006-11-07 21:50 ` John Heffner
2006-11-07 22:22 ` David Miller
2006-11-07 22:29 ` John Heffner
2006-11-08 10:07 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2006-11-08 15:55 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-08 16:29 ` Olaf Kirch
2006-11-08 18:38 ` Tim Chen
2006-11-08 19:44 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-08 22:10 ` Olaf Kirch [this message]
2006-11-08 22:07 ` Tim Chen
2006-11-08 23:00 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-11-08 22:32 ` Tim Chen
2006-11-09 9:21 ` Olaf Kirch
2006-11-08 22:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-11-09 1:08 ` Rick Jones
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=20061108221028.GA16889@suse.de \
--to=okir@suse.de \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=davem@sunset.davemloft.net \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).