From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: network namespace ipv6 perfs Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 21:01:18 +0100 Message-ID: <47CC590E.5070907@fr.ibm.com> References: <47CC0920.6000005@fr.ibm.com> <47CC53C9.1000400@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linux Containers , Linux Netdev List , Benjamin Thery To: Rick Jones Return-path: Received: from mtagate6.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.155]:52754 "EHLO mtagate6.de.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753681AbYCCUDq (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:03:46 -0500 Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate6.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m23K3juN252642 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 20:03:45 GMT Received: from d12av03.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av03.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.213]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m23K3i7t1134658 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 21:03:44 +0100 Received: from d12av03.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av03.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m23K3ieT009784 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 20:03:44 GMT In-Reply-To: <47CC53C9.1000400@hp.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Rick Jones wrote: > Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Some performance tests was made by Benjamin to watch out the impact of >> the network namespace. The good news is there is no impact when used >> with or without namespaces. That has been checked using a real network >> device inside a network namespace. > > The *_RR tests seem to show a drop in througput and corresponding > increases in service demand - could that be because things like TSO et > al cannot mask much of anything in the way of a path-length increase? Hmm. In fact Benjamin took the 2.6.23.16 kernel where there were no network namespace code at all. So these differences between 2.6.23.16 and 2.6.25-rc1 does not show a performance degradation especially related to the network namespaces. The important point is the 2.6.25-rc1 without ipv6 netns and 2.6.25-rc1 with ipv6 netns code applied, I mean the second and the third line and we can point that the ipv6 netns code does not degrade performances for either throughput and service demand. > From the annotations, I'm ass-u-me-ing that NS was only used on the > netperf side and not both netperf and netserver side? right :) > happy benchmarking, Thanks Rick. -- Daniel