| To: | Jonathan Earle <jearle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN) |
| From: | Antonin Kral <A.Kral@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:34:37 +0100 (CET) |
| Cc: | "'jamal'" <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>, lkml <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <28560036253BD41191A10000F8BCBD116BDCE5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
> > Throughput: 100Mbps is really nothing. Linux never had a problem with > > 4-500Mbps file serving. So throughput is an important number. so is > > end to end latency, but in file serving case, latency might > > not be a big deal so ignore it. > > If I try to route more than 40mbps (40% line utilization) through a 100mbps > port (tulip) on a 2.4.0-test kernel running on a pIII 500 (or higher) > system, not only does the performance drop to nearly 0, the system gets all > sluggish and unusable. This is with or without Jamal's FF patches. > > How are you managing to get such high throughput? > I have used 2.2.13 to 2.2.18 and 2.4.0, for first approach, with no patches and with no probles I managed bandwidth about 200 and 300 Mbps Antonin |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: ECN: Clearing the air, Pavel Machek |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN), Jonathan Earle |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with ECN), Jonathan Earle |
| Next by Thread: | 2.4.x kernel w/ /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/xx/hidden flag, Michael Merhej |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |