From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sonny Subject: kernel 2.4 vs 2.6 Traffic Controller performance Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 14:14:50 +0800 Message-ID: <9dbec86d0710022314o6db2b0baua6db543d52f312b6@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.227]:54749 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751412AbXJCGOv (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Oct 2007 02:14:51 -0400 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h31so3873966wxd for ; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:14:50 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Hello This is a repost, there seems to have a misunderstanding before. I hope this is the right place to ask this. Does any know if there is a substantial difference in the performance of the traffic controller between kernel 2.4 and 2.6. We tested it using 1 iperf server and use 250 and 500 clients, altering the burst. This is the set-up: iperf client - router (w/ traffic controller) - iperf server We use the top command inside the router to check the idle time of our router to see this. The results we got from the 2.4 kernel shows around 65-70% idle time while the 2.6 shows 60-65% idle time. We tried to use MRTG and we're not getting any results either. We want to know if we could improve the bandwidth by upgrading the kernel, else we would have to get a new bandwidth manager. Have anyone performed a similar test or can suggest a better way to do this. Thanks in advance.