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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-01 18:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ 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 5:40 ` Eric Dumazet
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 2:24 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
2011-10-05 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
2011-10-02 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
[not found] <6.2.5.6.2.20111001012019.05c05b80@flumedata.com>
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 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).