From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
Emmanuel Jeanvoine <emmanuel.jeanvoine@inria.fr>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Poor TCP bandwidth between network namespaces
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:54:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5115AC6F.50305@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1360373618.6696.2.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
On 02/08/2013 05:33 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 23:52 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 03:43:20PM +0100, Emmanuel Jeanvoine wrote:
>>> I'm wondering why the overhead is so high when performing TCP
>>> transfers between two network namespaces. Do you have any idea about
>>> this issue? And possibly, how to increase the bandwidth (without
>>> modifying the MTU on the veths) between network namespaces?
>>
>> You could try Eric's patch (already in net-next) and have a look at the rest
>> of the discussion:
>>
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/253589
>
> Another thing to consider is the default MTU value :
>
> 65536 for lo, and 1500 for veth
>
> It easily explains half performance for veth
>
> One another thing is the tx-nocache-copy setting, this can explain some
> extra percents.
Whenever I want to avoid matters of MTU, I try going with a test that
never sends anything larger than the smaller of the MTUs involved. One
such example might be (aggregate) netperf TCP_RR tests. Matters of path
length have a much more difficult time "hiding" from a TCP_RR (or
UDP_RR) test than a bulk transfer test.
happy benchmarking,
rick jones
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-09 1:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-04 14:43 Poor TCP bandwidth between network namespaces Emmanuel Jeanvoine
2013-02-04 22:52 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-02-09 1:33 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-02-09 1:54 ` Rick Jones [this message]
2013-02-09 2:17 ` Eric Dumazet
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=5115AC6F.50305@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=emmanuel.jeanvoine@inria.fr \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--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).