From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: Benjamin Thery <benjamin.thery@bull.net>
Cc: Linux Containers <containers@lists.osdl.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com,
Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@fr.ibm.com>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Subject: Re: L2 network namespaces + macvlan performances
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4692695A.8000301@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <468E724F.9070505@bull.net>
> Between the "normal" case and the "net namespace + macvlan" case,
> results are about the same for both the throughput and the local CPU
> load for the following test types: TCP_MAERTS, TCP_RR, UDP_STREAM, UDP_RR.
>
> macvlan looks like a very good candidate for network namespace in these
> cases.
>
> But, with the TCP_STREAM test, I observed the CPU load is about the
> same (that's what we wanted) but the throughput decreases by about 5%:
> from 850MB/s down to 810MB/s.
> I haven't investigated yet why the throughput decrease in the case.
> Does it come from my setup, from macvlan additional treatments, other? I
> don't know yet
Given that your "normal" case doesn't hit link-rate on the TCP_STREAM,
but it does with UDP_STREAM, it could be that there isn't quite enough
TCP window available, particularly given it seems the default settings
for sockets/windows are in use. You might try your normal case with the
test-specific -S and -s options to increase the socket buffer size:
netperf -H 192.168.76.1 -i 30,3 -l 20 -t TCP_STREAM -- -m 1400 -S 128K
-S 128K
and see if that gets you link-rate. One other possibility there is the
use of the 1400 byte send - that probably doesn't interact terribly well
with TSO. Also, it isn't (?) likely the MSS for the connection, which
you can have reported by adding a "-v 2" to the global options. You
could/should then use the MSS in a subsequent test, or perhaps better
still use a rather larger send size for TCP_STREAM|TCP_MAERTS - I myself
for no particular reason tend to use either 32KB or 64KB as the send
size in the netperf TCP_STREAM tests I run.
A final WAG - that the 1400 byte send size interacted poorly with the
Nagle algorithm since it was a sub-MSS send. When Nagle is involved,
things can be very timing-sensitive, change the timing ever so slightly
and you can have a rather larger change in throughput. That could be
dealt-with either with the larger send sizes mentioned above, or by
adding a test-specific -D option to set TCP_NODELAY.
happy benchmarking,
rick jones
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-09 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-06 16:48 L2 network namespaces + macvlan performances Benjamin Thery
2007-07-07 11:39 ` Daniel Lezcano
2007-07-09 11:55 ` Herbert Poetzl
2007-07-09 16:59 ` Rick Jones [this message]
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=4692695A.8000301@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=benjamin.thery@bull.net \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=dlezcano@fr.ibm.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).