I´m actually having three boxes here at work: One is a single-core Pentium 4 server @ 2,8 GHz on NetBSD 5.1 / FFSv1. Two is an 8-core Xeon E5440 server @ 2,8 GHz on NetBSD 6.0 / FFSv2 WAPBL. Three is a 4-core Xeon L5410 @ 2,33 GHz on NetBSD 7 BETA / FFSv2 WAPBL.
All of these have the same issue; transfer speeds are between 7,5 and 8,5 MB/s. That is why I suspected that this is a very basic issue. Copying to /dev/null makes no significant difference. 2015-03-19 17:11 GMT+01:00 Greg Troxel <[email protected]>: > > Stephan <[email protected]> writes: > >> I performed a quick benchmark with netio and it showed up the best >> possible speed on TCP. >> >> NETIO - Network Throughput Benchmark, Version 1.26 >> (C) 1997-2005 Kai Uwe Rommel >> >> TCP connection established. >> Packet size 1k bytes: 11506 KByte/s Tx, 11116 KByte/s Rx. >> Packet size 2k bytes: 11512 KByte/s Tx, 11469 KByte/s Rx. >> Packet size 4k bytes: 11513 KByte/s Tx, 11469 KByte/s Rx. >> Packet size 8k bytes: 11513 KByte/s Tx, 11100 KByte/s Rx. >> Packet size 16k bytes: 11513 KByte/s Tx, 11469 KByte/s Rx. >> Packet size 32k bytes: 11513 KByte/s Tx, 11470 KByte/s Rx. >> Done. > > That looks good; 91.7 Mb/s and I dimly recall 93 as max theoretically > possible with framing, IP, TCP headers. > >> UDP, however, does not work out of the box. It continuously displays >> these errors: >> >> sendto(): No buffer space available > > Well, that's not really not working. A modern cpu can call sendto() > faster than the interface can send packets, and without any sort of flow > control or congestion control, any buffer will be overwhelmed. But as > you say it's not relevant. > >> During an (uncompressed) scp copy, CPU usage on the receiver side is >> largely below 10 % and disk utilization about 50% (which makes me >> wonder because this disk can make about 100MB/s on sequential >> write). I can copy to other Linux and Solaris boxes in this network >> with about 10 - 11 MB/s from the NetBSD boxes - just receiving is >> slow. > > Is it just one NetBSD box that is slow? How many did you try? > Do you have wapbl enabled? Which fs? > > Try copying to /dev/null instead, to take the disk out of the experiment. > I just copied to the disk (I had used /dev/null before) on one of my > normal machines, and still got 10 MB/s.
