From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@osdl.org, jheffner@psc.edu,
netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [ipv4, e1000] multi client throughput testing
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 17:48:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42B21DD7.3@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050610.171127.59653238.davem@davemloft.net>
Ick, I get to be the bearer of my own bad news. I seem to mostly have a
client misconfiguration problem.
David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:56:50 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>
> > What did i miss?
>
> Thanks for all of the data Jesse. I'll try to sift through it this
> weekend.
Well, as it turns out I was sort of right all along, when i was thinking
that the client's tcp windows were not being serviced quickly enough.
First, I figured out that the windows client machines have a good "out
of the box" behavior when receiving tcp data from linux.
Second, the clients sending data to the server were maxing out their tcp
window at 64k and did *not* have rfc1323 enabled. After enabling
rfc1323 and upping the max window size to 128k, each client's throughput
went up quite a bit (there may be more headroom i didn't test yet).
Total throughput for us in this case is around 1560Mb/s now. I'd like
to see it at 1700-1800 but I don't think it will do it. We're still
running almost entirely in interrupt mode (with NAPI enabled) at about
7-8000 ints/s
Now I will go back and run with the netfilter enabled kernel and take a
look again at the faster replenish/fairness patches I've been working on.
Thanks for your attention,
Jesse
parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-17 0:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <20050610.171127.59653238.davem@davemloft.net>]
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=42B21DD7.3@intel.com \
--to=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jheffner@psc.edu \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@osdl.org \
/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).