From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vlad Yasevich Subject: Re: SCTP performance? Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:10:39 -0400 Message-ID: <5209413F.7090802@gmail.com> References: <52057734.6060306@candelatech.com> <1376090518.20509.14.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <520583AB.9030509@candelatech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Eric Dumazet , netdev To: Ben Greear Return-path: Received: from mail-vb0-f42.google.com ([209.85.212.42]:45877 "EHLO mail-vb0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751088Ab3HLUKn (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:10:43 -0400 Received: by mail-vb0-f42.google.com with SMTP id e12so6122590vbg.29 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:10:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <520583AB.9030509@candelatech.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 08/09/2013 08:04 PM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 08/09/2013 04:21 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 16:11 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >>> I just added some support for SCTP to my traffic-generator tool. >>> >>> I tried to send 1Gbps of traffic, bi-directional, across two >>> 10G interfaces. TCP does this without any trouble at all, >>> but SCTP was asymetric and never got above around 700Mbps, >>> and was usually stuck at < 500Mbps. >>> >>> perf top didn't show any obvious CPU bottlenecks. >>> >>> Has anyone done any recent performance testing with SCTP? >>> >>> I'd be interested to know the results if so... >> >> You mean there is no SCTP offload on the NIC and/or GRO, yes that's too >> bad. >> > > I'm sure that is part of the problem. > > I got much better results when I explicitly set the > tx/rx socket buffer sizes to 2MB, so maybe it just sucks > at auto-tuning it's socket buffer sizes. > > Thanks, > Ben > There is no buffer autotunning. There is also no GRO since SCTP doesn't lend itself easily to GRO. :( There has been some research efforts at autotunning, but nothing proposed. I'll see if I can find the code and make it work better. -vlad