On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 3:23 PM Bob McMahon <bob.mcma...@broadcom.com> wrote: > > 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.
multiple iperf3 instances, similar to what Chris Preimesberger demonstrates in his video, only we use upwards of 10 threads. (it works out to about 1 thread per 10Gb of bandwidth). You mentioned iperf2 would be interesting to try, I was just commenting that we went with multiple iperf3 instances vs a single "iperf2 -P" because iperf3 does some things we wanted (like CPU measurements) but lacks true multithreading. The "use multiple instances of iperf3" is a workaround to lack of proper multi-threading. Also, note, I'm not an expert, we came to this by way of a lot of internet reading and trial and error. > 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. It may. If one of my machines frees up I may try this to see how it works out. No promises though, I've already got too much work as it is :( > > 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." -- 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
