The client output for 2.0.10 with -e and -i 1 could provide useful
information.
Bob
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:32 AM, Nikita Gupta <nikitar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> Working without issue: iperf-2.0.10
> Time interval issue: iperf-3.3, iperf-3.1, iperf-3.5, iperf-3.0
>
> Regards,
> Nikita
>
> On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 3:37 AM, Bob McMahon <bob.mcma...@broadcom.com>
> wrote:
>
>> what version of iperf did you use? iperf -v should provide that.
>>
>> If it's a later version of iperf2 the output on the client of with the -e
>> option could be helpful.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Nikita Gupta <nikitar...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Bruce thanks for giving time on this issue.
>>>
>>> I am working on an embedded system with imx50.
>>> Server i'm using is RaspberryPi. Both the machines are connected on same
>>> network.
>>>
>>> Yes the system is a bit loaded. So this might be the reason.
>>> But if I reduce the window size then bandwidth also reduces and the time
>>> interval issue disappears.
>>>
>>> But with bandwidth of ~45M (which is the max it is showing) then it
>>> starts giving time interval issues.
>>>
>>> One more thing, I tried with iperf as well and its not giving any such
>>> issues on same machine with same server.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Bruce A. Mah <b...@es.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If memory serves me right, Nikita Gupta wrote:
>>>> > Hi team,
>>>> >
>>>> > While checking network performance using iperf3, I'm facing interval
>>>> > issue at client end. Below are the logs:
>>>> >
>>>> > [ 5] 0.00-1.05 sec 11.2 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec 0 42.4
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 1.05-2.01 sec 10.0 MBytes 88.2 Mbits/sec 0 42.4
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 2.01-3.07 sec 11.2 MBytes 88.4 Mbits/sec 0 42.4
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 3.07-4.05 sec 10.3 MBytes 88.5 Mbits/sec 0 42.4
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 4.05-5.11 sec 11.2 MBytes 88.6 Mbits/sec 0 42.4
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 5.11-6.06 sec 10.0 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec 0 42.4
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 6.06-7.07 sec 10.7 MBytes 89.0 Mbits/sec 0 42.4
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 7.07-8.02 sec 10.0 MBytes 88.6 Mbits/sec 0 66.5
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 8.02-9.09 sec 11.1 MBytes 86.8 Mbits/sec 0 112
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > [ 5] 9.09-10.06 sec 10.0 MBytes 85.7 Mbits/sec 0 112
>>>> > KBytes
>>>> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>> > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr
>>>> > [ 5] 0.00-10.06 sec 106 MBytes 88.1 Mbits/sec 0
>>>> sender
>>>> > [ 5] 0.00-10.12 sec 106 MBytes 87.6 Mbits/sec
>>>> > receiver
>>>> >
>>>> > I checked github bug #125 which was addressing this specific issue.
>>>> But
>>>> > no help.
>>>> > I have tried iperf3.0.5, iperf3.1, iperf3.3, iperf3.5. In all
>>>> versions,
>>>> > I'm getting the same issue.
>>>> >
>>>> > P.S. Server(with same iperf3 version) provides result as expected
>>>> with 1
>>>> > sec time interval, but client provides data at different time
>>>> intervals
>>>> > in every iteration.
>>>> > Kindly look into the issue and do let me know if m missing something.
>>>>
>>>> What are the command line arguments you are using (both client and
>>>> server side, sanitize them as necessary0? Also could you say something
>>>> about the environment you're running in? In particular, what OS and
>>>> hardware on the client and server, and what kind of network path are you
>>>> going over?
>>>>
>>>> I rarely see issues like this (where the statistics printing intervals
>>>> are not aligned to whole second boundaries) in the middle of a test,
>>>> although it's been known to happen at the end of a test, for conditions
>>>> that only happen at the end of a test.
>>>>
>>>> It seems like the timers within iperf3 that control when statistics and
>>>> computed and printed aren't firing when they're supposed to. On my
>>>> laptop (MacBook Pro) this happens close enough to the correct time that
>>>> the timestamps appear to be exactly aligned to whole second boundaries
>>>> (they're not, but close enough given the precision of printing the
>>>> values in the output). This situation could happen on slow hardware
>>>> (some kind of embedded system?), on a virtual machine, or on a system
>>>> that is very heavily loaded. We would need some more information to
>>>> determine which of this is the case (or whether it's something
>>>> completely different).
>>>>
>>>> Bruce.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Nikita Gupta
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Iperf-users mailing list
>>> Iperf-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iperf-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Nikita Gupta
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Iperf-users mailing list
Iperf-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iperf-users
