hmm, I confused. Did you run multiple iperf 3 sessions or iperf 2 with the -P 8,10 option or possibly both? Your previous response said the only way to get this was with multiple iperf 3 sessions and didn't mention iperf 2 nor the use of -P.
In theory, iperf 2 could outperform iperf 3 per the use of threads, e..g separating the traffic from the accounting and reporting. I'm curious to actual experimental results. Note: Iperf 2.0.13 is really required for this class of testing as older iperf versions (e.g. 2.0.5) have performance related bugs. Bob On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:49 AM Jeffrey Lane <j...@canonical.com> wrote: > For my needs (very simple testing) yes. We had to do that because > iperf3 doesn't multi-thread like iperf 2 did, unfortunately. > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 1:37 PM Bob McMahon <bob.mcma...@broadcom.com> > wrote: > > > > Is it just multiple threads? It might be interesting to try iperf > 2.0.13 and the -P 8 option. > > > > Bob > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:04 AM Jeffrey Lane <j...@canonical.com> > wrote: > >> > >> I've been working on this a bit and the only way to get it was to run > >> multiple iperf3 threads. To do this, you have to set up several (we do > >> about 8 threads for 100Gb, possibly 10) on the target (listening to > >> different ports) and then run to client instances (one for each port), > >> then aggregate the results for each, and that nets in the 92-97Gb/s > >> range overall. > >> > >> Additionally, in some cases tweaks are necessary (jumbo frames, some > >> kernel tweaks, driver tweaks, etc) but that's all case-by-case. > >> > >> And it is very much constrained by CPU and PCIe bandwidth. > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:38 PM Chris Preimesberger <ccpi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > I tried and got up to 87Gbps throughput. The results were CPU > bound. I want to build new i7 9900K PCs and re-test. Here's a video of my > attempt: > >> > > >> > https://youtu.be/uh2zvaaH0hc > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, May 30, 2019, 3:08 AM Ashwajit Bhoutkar <bhout...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Hi, > >> >> > >> >> Just wanted to check whether it is possible to test the throughput > of 100G link using iPerf. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Thank You, > >> >> > >> >> Kind Regards, > >> >> Ashwajit > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> Iperf-users mailing list > >> >> Iperf-users@lists.sourceforge.net > >> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iperf-users > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Iperf-users mailing list > >> > Iperf-users@lists.sourceforge.net > >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iperf-users > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Jeff Lane > >> Engineering Manager > >> IHV/OEM Alliances and Server Certification > >> > >> "Entropy isn't what it used to be." > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Iperf-users mailing list > >> Iperf-users@lists.sourceforge.net > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iperf-users > > > > -- > Jeff Lane > Engineering Manager > IHV/OEM Alliances and Server Certification > > "Entropy isn't what it used to be." >
_______________________________________________ Iperf-users mailing list Iperf-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iperf-users
