From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: running aggregate netperf TCP_RR Re: e1000 full-duplex TCP performance well below wire speed Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:11:48 -0800 Message-ID: <47A20F64.5030609@hp.com> References: <36D9DB17C6DE9E40B059440DB8D95F52044F81DF@orsmsx418.amr.corp.intel.com> <36D9DB17C6DE9E40B059440DB8D95F52044F8BA3@orsmsx418.amr.corp.intel.com> <47A1E553.8010006@aei.mpg.de> <36D9DB17C6DE9E40B059440DB8D95F52044F8EC9@orsmsx418.amr.corp.intel.com> <47A204E5.7060406@aei.mpg.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Brandeburg, Jesse" , Bruce Allen , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Henning Fehrmann , Bruce Allen To: Carsten Aulbert Return-path: Received: from g5t0006.atlanta.hp.com ([15.192.0.43]:28398 "EHLO g5t0006.atlanta.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761574AbYAaSLv (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:11:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: <47A204E5.7060406@aei.mpg.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > PS: Am I right that the TCP_RR tests should only be run on a single node > at a time, not on both ends simultaneously? It depends on what you want to measure. In this specific case since the goal is to saturate the link in both directions it is unlikely you should need a second instance running, and if you do, going to a TCP_STREAM+TCP_MAERTS pair might be indicated. If one is measuring aggregate small transaction (perhaps packet) performance, then there can be times when running multiple, concurrent, aggregate TCP_RR tests is indicated. Also, from time to time you may want to experiment with the value you use with -b - the value necessary to get to saturation may not always be the same - particularly as you switch from link to link and from LAN to WAN and all those familiar bandwidthXdelay considerations. happy benchmarking, rick jones