| To: | Bart Alewijnse <scarfboy@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: gigabit trouble |
| From: | Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 30 Jul 2004 20:54:12 +0200 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <b71082d804073008157cf1d6c0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from scarfboy@xxxxxxxxx on Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 05:15:41PM +0200 |
| References: | <b71082d8040729094537e59a11@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040729210401.A32456@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <b71082d80407291541f9d6f93@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <b71082d804073008157cf1d6c0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5.1i |
Bart Alewijnse <scarfboy@xxxxxxxxx> : [...] > Definately. I've now seen speeds up to 22MB/s, but only in pure > network benching (netio), and only with udp, although I guess > that makes a some sense. It seems low. On a non-napi setup, I'd expect your celeron box to stand at least 20~30 kIRQ/s if the hardware is not flawed. [...] > I assume the 20MB/s top speed on my gbit cards is io limiting, > and possibly the fact that they're 32bit cards in 33mhz slots. > Still, it's far from impressive. Any suggestions (on where to > go) about improving it? See Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.txt and the r/wmem parameters for a start. The 2.6.8-rc2-mm1 version of the r8169 driver is suggested. A dumb 'vmstat 1' output during test could give some hint. Can I assume that the systems are stable if not fast ? -- Ueimor |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: ipsec, nat-t, iproute2?, James Morris |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC,PATCH] fastroute dead code..., Tim Mattox |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: gigabit trouble, Bart Alewijnse |
| Next by Thread: | Re: gigabit trouble, Bart Alewijnse |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |