Lloyd Kvam wrote: > On Sat, 2009-10-10 at 15:20 -0400, Bruce Labitt wrote: > >> Nit in solution: TCP transport time >> FFT execution time, rendering >> attempted solution non-viable >> >> Researches TCP optimization: Reads countless papers on tcp >> optimization techniques... Fails to find a robust solutions or >> methodology for problem. Tries most techniques written in papers, >> only realizing a 10% gain. Not good enough. Still needs to be faster >> >> Driven to more exotic techniques to reduce transport time. Explores >> parallel sockets, other techniques >> > > Does a simple netcat transfer go fast enough? In other words, can > normal TCP in a simple case do the job? > > I'll try it when I go back. Netperf seems to indicate I can do it - I got ~770Mbit/sec. It is kind of baffling that my stuff only gets 141Mbps... :( I was avoiding looking at netperf source, but now appears to be a good time... > If not, would you be better off "talking" ethernet? Presumably you do > not need the routing capabilities of TCP. As I understand it, your > client and server are on the same LAN. > > http://aschauf.landshut.org/fh/linux/udp_vs_raw/index.html > > I don't know if this is helpful. Without knowing the timings from basic > test cases, it's hard to know where to find the best point of attack. > > Thanks for the suggestion and link. I'll check it out. -Bruce
_______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/