As the other guy said, policing is the worst thing you can do. Shape...
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Tony <[email protected]> wrote: > That doesn't sound at all good. No way should you need that many (25) > sessions. > > Is there any other traffic on the link ? Is it brand new ? Any duplex > mismatch type issues ? > > I would suggest running an "iperf -u -d" to run UDP in both directions at > the same time, might turn up something unusual. Remove any other devices > (ie. your routers) before testing so you will know that is not a problem. I > assume your two linux test machines are on the same L3 subnet from what > you've described ? > > > regards, > Tony. > > > > > > > > >________________________________ > > From: CiscoNSP List <[email protected]> > >To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; Azher Mughal < > [email protected]> > >Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > >Sent: Tuesday, 2 April 2013 10:37 AM > >Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Performance issue on link > > > > > > > >Sorry - Forgot to add: > > > > > > > > > >POP A -> POP B - only requires 8 sessions, but POP B -> POP A requires 25 > sessions to achieve ~38Mb? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> From: [email protected] > >> To: [email protected]; [email protected] > >> Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 11:28:50 +1100 > >> CC: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Performance issue on link > >> > >> Thanks Tony - With multiple sessions (8), I can achieve ~38Mb/sec > consistently. > >> > >> Is it simply not feasible to expect ~40Mb with a single tcp transfer > (Without significant adjustments to both Linux servers?) > >> > >> > >> > Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 17:10:42 -0700 > >> > From: [email protected] > >> > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Performance issue on link > >> > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > >> > CC: [email protected] > >> > > >> > Try using multiple TCP sessions "iperf -P 5" (note - capital "P"). > >> > > >> > > >> > regards, > >> > Tony. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > > From: CiscoNSP List <[email protected]> > >> > > To: Azher Mughal <[email protected]> > >> > > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > >> > > Sent: Tuesday, 2 April 2013 9:51 AM > >> > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Performance issue on link > >> > > > >> > >T hanks - Ill check them out now > >> > > > >> > >> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:16:36 -0700 > >> > >> From: [email protected] > >> > >> To: [email protected] > >> > >> CC: [email protected] > >> > >> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Performance issue on link > >> > >> > >> > >> These might be helpful: > >> > >> > >> > >> http://fasterdata.es.net/network-tuning/ > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > http://www.mellanox.com/related-docs/prod_software/Performance_Tuning_Guide_for_Mellanox_Network_Adapters.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> -Azher > >> > >> > >> > >> On 4/1/2013 3:51 PM, CiscoNSP List wrote: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > >> > > >> > >> > We have a 40Mb link between 2 POPs - Latency ~65m/sec (No > packet-loss) > >> > >> > > >> > >> > POP A Is a 7301 and 2960POP B is a 7200 and 4948 > >> > >> > > >> > >> > 40Mb link is connected to the two switches (L2), and then a > trunk link > >> > > to both routers for all L3. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Have a Linux server connected to both switches, and achieve the > >> > > following performance: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > IPERF (UDP) > >> > >> > POP A -> POP B - 38.5Mb/secPOP B -> POP A - 38.5Mb/sec > >> > >> > > >> > >> > IPERF (TCP) > >> > >> > POP A -> POP B - ~20Mb/secPOP B -> POP A - ~12Mb/sec > >> > >> > > >> > >> > FTP > >> > >> > POP A -> POP B - ~38Mb/secPOP B -> POP A - ~16Mb/sec > >> > >> > > >> > >> > WGET > >> > >> > POP A -> POP B - ~30Mb/sec POP B -> POP A - ~16Mb/sec > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Any suggestions on why I am seeing poor performance with TCP > >> > > transfers? (Especially POP B -> POP A direction) - I've tried > adjusting > >> > > the window size in IPERF but it actually made the results worse? > >> > >> > Thanks in advance. > >> > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > >> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
