No nothing showed in the logs. And I don't understand why such a performance difference between routing and bridging.
Marco Peereboom wrote: > Possibly interrupt issues. Where them dmesg'? > > On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 07:04:47PM +0200, Renaud Allard wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I just had the opportunity to test some Fluke network equipment, notably >> one which is able to throughput test gigabit networks. >> >> I installed a Nexcom NSA1086 with OpenBSD 4.1-stable and did some tests. >> The NSA1086 units are equipped with a Pentium IV 3.2Ghz (hyperthreading >> disabled), and 1Gb ram. They have 4 sk gigabit interfaces, and 4 msk >> gigabit interfaces. Here are the tests: >> >> ********** >> ifconfig sk0 up >> ifconfig sk1 up >> ifconfig bridge0 create >> ifconfig bridge0 up >> brconfig bridge0 add sk0 >> brconfig bridge0 add sk1 >> sysctl kern.maxclusters=256000 >> >> Then I connected the fluke analyzers to both sk ports. connections were >> correctly seen at 1000 base T full Duplex. then I started a throughput >> test on 1Gbps, and I was extremely surprised to see how performance was >> very poor. The throughput was only about 77Mbps. >> >> *************** >> >> Seeing that I decided to try on msk interfaces and got about the same >> "performance". >> >> *************** >> >> Then I configured routing between two interfaces. >> ifconfig sk2 inet 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 >> ifconfig sk3 inet 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 >> sysctl net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 >> sysctl kern.maxclusters=256000 >> >> I did the throughput test, and got about 500Mbps both on sk and msk, >> with the CPU keeping quiet. >> >> ************** >> >> So the weak performance doesn't seem related to the bus, the CPU, or the >> sk/msk drivers. Has someone an explanation on why I get this kind of >> behavior?
