:this is what i get, it's between a dell 2540 (dual PIII/900) and an Intel Sl2
:(dual PIII/1g). both are using intel's em driver.
:
:majadara> ./tbench 1 bagel
:Throughput 12.4785 MB/sec (NB=15.5981 MB/sec 124.785 MBit/sec)
:...
:Throughput 37.002 MB/sec (NB=46.2526 MB/sec 370.02 MBit/sec)
: ./tbench 20 bagel
:Throughput 37.0574 MB/sec (NB=46.3217 MB/sec 370.574 MBit/sec)
:
:it starts very nice, but maxes out at about 37MB/sec.
Yah. Anything running over GigE is going to be extremely
finicky about the cpu/hardware/motherboard design. The best
tbench results I got was 47 MB/sec between two DELL2550's(1.1GHz).
It was definitely cpu-saturated. 37 MB/sec sounds about
right for a 900 MHz box (with everything else being equal).
This is actually fairly good performance considering the
Big Giant Lock issue with SMP.
:btw, before the patch tbench was moving bits (not bytes :-) at turtle speed
:(i thought that it was hung, but tcpdump showed some trafffic :-)
:
:good work! now lets see if nfs/tcp is ok again.
:
:danny
It should be. I now get 7.8 MBytes/sec with a TCP mount and
*no* nfsiod's running where before I got buckus.
And with nfsiod's I get 12.3 MBytes/sec over 100BaseTX
(100% saturation). On the GigE I get 16 MBytes/sec without
nfsiod and around 22 MBytes/sec with nfsiod running.
That's doing NFS reads... a 'dd' to read a large file over
NFS, and very good for a TCP mount. UDP mounts over the
GigE get 19 MB/s and 31 MB/s reading, which is also very good
for a single-file read.
I wish we'd gone after these problems earlier. If we had our
ducks lined up in a row we could have had these (trivial) fixes
in as early as FreeBSD-4.3 and would have got much more
favorable numbers in the several Linux<->FreeBSD comparison
articles that have come out in the last six months. Oh well.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
