Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-03 Thread Ross Walker
On Dec 2, 2010, at 11:47 AM, miguelmeda...@sapo.pt wrote:

 
 For completeness (since many previous posts have touched on this), we don't
 use jumbo frames since we have no problem reaching wirespeed with normal 1500
 frames.
 
 
 Jumbo frames have advantages  other than reaching wirespeed. Its use  
 produces less overhead and in general less CPU utilization.
 Your network will see less trafic and your CPUs will be free to do other work.

True, like always it depends on your CPU and your network application's 
sensitivity to latency.

Jumbo frames equals less CPU but more network latency, more network latency 
equals less achievable throughput.

You don't need jumbo with 1Gbe and a current CPU, but for 10Gbe, jumbo frames 
are recommended, unless you can dedicate a core per 10Gbe NIC.

-Ross

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-03 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 12/02/2010 04:28 AM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
 IMO lots of people waste time on jumbo frames when there's really no (or
 very little) need.

That depends on the protocols in use and your TCP window configuration. 
  Streaming protocols like HTTP may benefit less from jumbo frames 
(except, as has been noted, for reduced CPU use) in some configurations, 
but latency-sensitive protocols like CIFS and NFS will benefit greatly.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-03 Thread Ross Walker
On Dec 3, 2010, at 2:33 PM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote:

 On 12/02/2010 04:28 AM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
 IMO lots of people waste time on jumbo frames when there's really no (or
 very little) need.
 
 That depends on the protocols in use and your TCP window configuration. 
  Streaming protocols like HTTP may benefit less from jumbo frames 
 (except, as has been noted, for reduced CPU use) in some configurations, 
 but latency-sensitive protocols like CIFS and NFS will benefit greatly.

If the protocol is latency sensitive then jumbo frames are BAD as it adds more 
latency because frames take longer to fill, longer to transmit and thus other 
conversations have to wait longer (poor pipelining/interlacing).

CIFS/NFS aren't really latency sensitive protocols though. If a protocol has a 
big TCP window then it will not tend to be latency sensitive.

A protocol that is latency sensitive would be iSCSI with sequential IO. Each 
iSCSI PDU is (default) 8K which is a lot smaller then say the 32K CIFS/NFS 
protocol units one sees, so bumping up the latency just a tad will mean you 
will only get 25MB/s 4k sequential throughput instead of 40MB/s. Bumping up the 
iSCSI PDU helps but limits the total number of simultaneous iSCSI PDUs a target 
can handle.

That's why typically on 1Gbe iSCSI, it's better to use 1500 MTU instead of 
9000. With 10Gbe though it uses a lot of CPU to send 1500 byte frames, so there 
it's better using 9000 MTU.

Everything is a compromise due to finite resources.

-Ross

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-03 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 12/03/2010 03:48 PM, Ross Walker wrote:

 If the protocol is latency sensitive then jumbo frames are BAD as it
 adds more latency because frames take longer to fill, longer to
 transmit and thus other conversations have to wait longer (poor
 pipelining/interlacing).

 CIFS/NFS aren't really latency sensitive protocols though. If a
 protocol has a big TCP window then it will not tend to be latency
 sensitive.

I measure better throughput on NFS with jumbo frames than without. 
Measurement trumps assertions. :)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-03 Thread Ross Walker
On Dec 3, 2010, at 7:48 PM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote:

 On 12/03/2010 03:48 PM, Ross Walker wrote:
 
 If the protocol is latency sensitive then jumbo frames are BAD as it
 adds more latency because frames take longer to fill, longer to
 transmit and thus other conversations have to wait longer (poor
 pipelining/interlacing).
 
 CIFS/NFS aren't really latency sensitive protocols though. If a
 protocol has a big TCP window then it will not tend to be latency
 sensitive.
 
 I measure better throughput on NFS with jumbo frames than without. 
 Measurement trumps assertions. :)

All I was trying to get across is that jumbo frames aren't to be used in 
latency sensitive applications as it adds latency.

As your findings show NFS is not a latency sensitive application and thus why 
you see better throughput with jumbo frames. That is also why NFS/CIFS can be 
used over a WAN while a latency sensitive protocol such as iSCSI is almost 
useless over the WAN.

-Ross

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread Veiko Kukk
On 01/12/10 21:12, Boris Epstein wrote:
 So now my question is, what PCI 1 Gbit/s Ethernet adapters should I
 use under CentOS? If you have had a consistent positive experience
 with any particular chipset/brand please speak up.

Use Intel NIC-s and you don't have to worry.

-- 
Veiko
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread Peter Kjellström
On Wednesday 01 December 2010 20:12:18 Boris Epstein wrote:
 Hello listmates,
 
 As some of you may know we have been having a really bad problem with
 Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 cards. See here for details:
 
 http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?24,140124,140224
 
 So now my question is, what PCI 1 Gbit/s Ethernet adapters should I
 use under CentOS? If you have had a consistent positive experience
 with any particular chipset/brand please speak up.

We have O(1000) of both broadcom and intel (various models) and we've had very 
few problems over the years with those. I wouldn't hesitate to buy either but 
given a choice I'd go for intel (since I do think the few hickups we've had, 
more often than not, struck the broadcoms).

For completeness (since many previous posts have touched on this), we don't 
use jumbo frames since we have no problem reaching wirespeed with normal 1500 
frames.

/Peter


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread Christopher Chan
On Thursday, December 02, 2010 06:53 PM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
 For completeness (since many previous posts have touched on this), we don't
 use jumbo frames since we have no problem reaching wirespeed with normal 1500
 frames.

Seriously? What switches?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread Peter Kjellström
On Thursday 02 December 2010 12:22:38 Christopher Chan wrote:
 On Thursday, December 02, 2010 06:53 PM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
  For completeness (since many previous posts have touched on this), we
  don't use jumbo frames since we have no problem reaching wirespeed with
  normal 1500 frames.
 
 Seriously? What switches?

Mostly procurve, but really, 1G eth goes wirespeed almost regardless what you 
do to it nowadays. In fact, I can run wirespeed 10G eth through our cisco, 
procurve and bladnetworks without going jumbo.

IMO lots of people waste time on jumbo frames when there's really no (or very 
little) need.

/Peter


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread Bent Terp
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Timo Schoeler
timo.schoe...@riscworks.net wrote:
 You get what you pay for -- this is a valid rule of thumb throughout the
 whole life.

Except with CentOS - we get SO much more than we pay for :-D
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread Christopher Chan
On Thursday, December 02, 2010 08:28 PM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
 On Thursday 02 December 2010 12:22:38 Christopher Chan wrote:

   On Thursday, December 02, 2010 06:53 PM, Peter Kjellström wrote:

For completeness (since many previous posts have touched on this), we

don't use jumbo frames since we have no problem reaching wirespeed with

normal 1500 frames.

  

   Seriously? What switches?

 Mostly procurve, but really, 1G eth goes wirespeed almost regardless
 what you do to it nowadays. In fact, I can run wirespeed 10G eth through
 our cisco, procurve and bladnetworks without going jumbo.

I have HP Procurves too and I don't get wirespeed...

I'll run an artificial benchmark...maybe it's disk i/o in the way.



 IMO lots of people waste time on jumbo frames when there's really no (or
 very little) need.


Maybe...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread m . roth
Bent Terp wrote:
 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Timo Schoeler
 timo.schoe...@riscworks.net wrote:
 You get what you pay for -- this is a valid rule of thumb throughout the
 whole life.

 Except with CentOS - we get SO much more than we pay for :-D

Hah - I was thinking of another angle: so, Timo, you pay for love?

  mark that's not quite what I think of when I use that word

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread Timo Schoeler
On 12/02/2010 04:34 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 Bent Terp wrote:
 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Timo Schoeler
 timo.schoe...@riscworks.net  wrote:
 You get what you pay for -- this is a valid rule of thumb throughout the
 whole life.

 Except with CentOS - we get SO much more than we pay for :-D

 Hah - I was thinking of another angle: so, Timo, you pay for love?

No, I get paid. Billions of dollars. ;P

mark that's not quite what I think of when I use that word

 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread m . roth
Timo Schoeler wrote:
 On 12/02/2010 04:34 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 Bent Terp wrote:
 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Timo Schoeler
 timo.schoe...@riscworks.net  wrote:
 You get what you pay for -- this is a valid rule of thumb throughout
 the
 whole life.

 Except with CentOS - we get SO much more than we pay for :-D

 Hah - I was thinking of another angle: so, Timo, you pay for love?

 No, I get paid. Billions of dollars. ;P

I'm too old - shouldn't that be billions and billions? g

  mark do you have a spare million or two from those billions?

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread miguelmedalha

 For completeness (since many previous posts have touched on this), we don't
 use jumbo frames since we have no problem reaching wirespeed with normal 1500
 frames.


Jumbo frames have advantages  other than reaching wirespeed. Its use  
produces less overhead and in general less CPU utilization.
Your network will see less trafic and your CPUs will be free to do other work.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-02 Thread Nico Kadel-Garcia
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:34 AM,  m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 Bent Terp wrote:
 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Timo Schoeler
 timo.schoe...@riscworks.net wrote:
 You get what you pay for -- this is a valid rule of thumb throughout the
 whole life.

 Except with CentOS - we get SO much more than we pay for :-D

 Hah - I was thinking of another angle: so, Timo, you pay for love?

      mark that's not quite what I think of when I use that word

Rent to own
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Timo Schoeler
On 12/01/2010 08:12 PM, Boris Epstein wrote:
 Hello listmates,

 As some of you may know we have been having a really bad problem with
 Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 cards. See here for details:

 http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?24,140124,140224

 So now my question is, what PCI 1 Gbit/s Ethernet adapters should I
 use under CentOS? If you have had a consistent positive experience
 with any particular chipset/brand please speak up.

Well, Realcrap is known to be crap everywhere. Ask the OpenBSD guys. ;)

Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there 
are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an 
internal design glitch.

HTH,

Timo

 Thanks.

 Boris.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Steve Thompson
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been 
no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.

Steve
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Gilbert Sebenste
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Steve Thompson wrote:

 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.

Thirded. :-) Same thing here, even with generic Intel 1 GB Ethernet cards.

***
Gilbert Sebenste 
(My opinions only!)  **
***
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Boris Epstein
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Gilbert Sebenste
seben...@weather.admin.niu.edu wrote:
 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Steve Thompson wrote:

 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.

 Thirded. :-) Same thing here, even with generic Intel 1 GB Ethernet cards.

 ***
 Gilbert Sebenste                                                     
 (My opinions only!)                                                  **
 ***
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Thanks. Looks good.

I just looked around - looks like manufacturers tend not to list the
chipset in their NIC specifications (like here, for instance:
http://www.trendnet.com/products/proddetail.asp?prod=140_TEG-PCITXRcat=14
)

Is there a list somewhere out there listing what card features what chipset?

It definitely looks like it is best to just stick to the better
chipsets - might be a little more expensive but definitely worth the
money.

Thanks.

Boris.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread m . roth
Boris Epstein wrote:
 Hello listmates,

 As some of you may know we have been having a really bad problem with
 Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 cards. See here for details:

 http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?24,140124,140224

 So now my question is, what PCI 1 Gbit/s Ethernet adapters should I
 use under CentOS? If you have had a consistent positive experience
 with any particular chipset/brand please speak up.

I *think* most of our servers have Broadcoms.

mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Timo Schoeler
On 12/01/2010 08:33 PM, Boris Epstein wrote:
 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Gilbert Sebenste
 seben...@weather.admin.niu.edu  wrote:
 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Steve Thompson wrote:

 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.

 Thirded. :-) Same thing here, even with generic Intel 1 GB Ethernet cards.

 ***
 Gilbert Sebenste 
 (My opinions only!)  **
 ***
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


 Thanks. Looks good.

 I just looked around - looks like manufacturers tend not to list the
 chipset in their NIC specifications (like here, for instance:
 http://www.trendnet.com/products/proddetail.asp?prod=140_TEG-PCITXRcat=14
 )

 Is there a list somewhere out there listing what card features what chipset?

 It definitely looks like it is best to just stick to the better
 chipsets - might be a little more expensive but definitely worth the
 money.

You get what you pay for -- this is a valid rule of thumb throughout the 
whole life.

 Thanks.

 Boris.

Timo
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Nicolas Ross
 Is there a list somewhere out there listing what card features what 
 chipset?

 It definitely looks like it is best to just stick to the better
 chipsets - might be a little more expensive but definitely worth the
 money.

 You get what you pay for -- this is a valid rule of thumb throughout the
 whole life.

Amen !

As for the nics, Intel, Intel, nothing but intel. Since a couple of year, I 
put nothing but intel nics in our servers. Most of them are on-board 8257*, 
like 82575EB in our mos recent batch of server. Other add-on card are 
pro1000 with chipset 82541PI.

Regards, 

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Christopher Chan
On Thursday, December 02, 2010 03:28 AM, Steve Thompson wrote:
 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.


Please take note that some Intel 1G nics do not have jumbo frame support 
at all. So you won't have issues with jumbo frames either way. The 
question is whether there is jumbo frame support.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Steve Thompson
On Thu, 2 Dec 2010, Christopher Chan wrote:

 On Thursday, December 02, 2010 03:28 AM, Steve Thompson wrote:
 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.

 Please take note that some Intel 1G nics do not have jumbo frame support
 at all. So you won't have issues with jumbo frames either way. The
 question is whether there is jumbo frame support.

The Intel NICs that I mentioned, 82576 and 82571EB, are both in use in 
DRBD replication links with an MTU of 9000. We usually configure each such 
link as a point-to-point bonding pair (balance-rr), and get 1.95 Gb/s 
throughput with iperf, and about 165 MB/sec with drbd (but of course the 
latter is disk dependent). CentOS 5.5, x86_64, Dell PE2900 servers. Solid.

Steve
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Ross Walker
On Dec 1, 2010, at 5:10 PM, Christopher Chan christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk 
wrote:

 On Thursday, December 02, 2010 03:28 AM, Steve Thompson wrote:
 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:
 
 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.
 
 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.
 
 
 Please take note that some Intel 1G nics do not have jumbo frame support 
 at all. So you won't have issues with jumbo frames either way. The 
 question is whether there is jumbo frame support.

From my memory those that don't do jumbo were desktop versions of the 
chipset.

I believe all current manufactured models support jumbo frames.

-Ross

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Christopher Chan
On Thursday, December 02, 2010 07:50 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
 On Dec 1, 2010, at 5:10 PM, Christopher 
 Chanchristopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk  wrote:

 On Thursday, December 02, 2010 03:28 AM, Steve Thompson wrote:
 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.


 Please take note that some Intel 1G nics do not have jumbo frame support
 at all. So you won't have issues with jumbo frames either way. The
 question is whether there is jumbo frame support.

 From my memory those that don't do jumbo were desktop versions of the 
 chipset.

 I believe all current manufactured models support jumbo frames.


The Desktop GT series certainly does not have jumbo frames. Not sure 
about others.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Nico Kadel-Garcia
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Boris Epstein borepst...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks. Looks good.

 I just looked around - looks like manufacturers tend not to list the
 chipset in their NIC specifications (like here, for instance:
 http://www.trendnet.com/products/proddetail.asp?prod=140_TEG-PCITXRcat=14
 )

In fact, they lie. All sorts of add-on cards from various vendors,
with the same card type and model number, have different chipsets.

This has caused me endless grief in environments where my employer
refused to do normal kernel updates, and the new chipsets were only
compatible with the newer kernel.

 Is there a list somewhere out there listing what card features what chipset?

 It definitely looks like it is best to just stick to the better
 chipsets - might be a little more expensive but definitely worth the
 money.

See above, and yes.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 12/01/2010 11:17 AM, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

Specifically the 82573 chipsets, which are still fairly common on 
motherboards.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Boris Epstein
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote:
 On 12/01/2010 11:17 AM, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

 Specifically the 82573 chipsets, which are still fairly common on
 motherboards.
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


That's good, but I am looking for expansion card NICs.

Boris.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 12/01/2010 06:07 PM, Boris Epstein wrote:
 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Gordon Messmeryiny...@eburg.com  wrote:
 On 12/01/2010 11:17 AM, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

 Specifically the 82573 chipsets, which are still fairly common on
 motherboards.

 That's good, but I am looking for expansion card NICs.

I may not have been clear.  The Intel 82573 chipsets are faulty, and 
should be avoided.  I've mostly seen them on motherboards, but I have no 
reason to believe you won't find them on expansion cards.  Avoid them.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread William Warren
On 12/1/2010 2:12 PM, Boris Epstein wrote:
 Hello listmates,

 As some of you may know we have been having a really bad problem with
 Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 cards. See here for details:

 http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?24,140124,140224

 So now my question is, what PCI 1 Gbit/s Ethernet adapters should I
 use under CentOS? If you have had a consistent positive experience
 with any particular chipset/brand please speak up.

 Thanks.

 Boris.
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Intel.  No need to mess with any Winnic(which is what most are).  
Broadcom is another good one.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread William Warren
On 12/1/2010 2:33 PM, Boris Epstein wrote:
 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Gilbert Sebenste
 seben...@weather.admin.niu.edu  wrote:
 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Steve Thompson wrote:

 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.
 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.
 Thirded. :-) Same thing here, even with generic Intel 1 GB Ethernet cards.

 ***
 Gilbert Sebenste 
 (My opinions only!)  **
 ***
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

 Thanks. Looks good.

 I just looked around - looks like manufacturers tend not to list the
 chipset in their NIC specifications (like here, for instance:
 http://www.trendnet.com/products/proddetail.asp?prod=140_TEG-PCITXRcat=14
 )

 Is there a list somewhere out there listing what card features what chipset?

 It definitely looks like it is best to just stick to the better
 chipsets - might be a little more expensive but definitely worth the
 money.

 Thanks.

 Boris.
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
trendnet is realtek.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread William Warren
On 12/1/2010 2:33 PM, Boris Epstein wrote:
 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Gilbert Sebenste
 seben...@weather.admin.niu.edu  wrote:
 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Steve Thompson wrote:

 On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.
 Seconded. I have a load of Intel 82576 and 82571EB's, and there have been
 no issues at all, including with Jumbo frames.
 Thirded. :-) Same thing here, even with generic Intel 1 GB Ethernet cards.

 ***
 Gilbert Sebenste 
 (My opinions only!)  **
 ***
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

 Thanks. Looks good.

 I just looked around - looks like manufacturers tend not to list the
 chipset in their NIC specifications (like here, for instance:
 http://www.trendnet.com/products/proddetail.asp?prod=140_TEG-PCITXRcat=14
 )

 Is there a list somewhere out there listing what card features what chipset?

 It definitely looks like it is best to just stick to the better
 chipsets - might be a little more expensive but definitely worth the
 money.

 Thanks.

 Boris.
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
if you look at the pic on that page see the crab?  that's realtek.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread John Hodrien
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Timo Schoeler wrote:

 Well, Realcrap is known to be crap everywhere. Ask the OpenBSD guys. ;)

 Intel. Broadcom. That's what we use here w/o any issues; however, there
 are some Intel NICs that are *not* able to handle Jumbo Frames due to an
 internal design glitch.

I've had Broadcom NICs just go off into their own little world requiring the
machine to be physically powered down and back up again before they'd start
working again.  Replaced with an Intel quad port board (igb driver) and all
was decidedly well.

jh
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] 1 Gbit/s Ethernet NIC under CentOS

2010-12-01 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 12/01/2010 11:11 PM, John Hodrien wrote:

 I've had Broadcom NICs just go off into their own little world requiring the
 machine to be physically powered down and back up again before they'd start
 working again.  Replaced with an Intel quad port board (igb driver) and all
 was decidedly well.

I've seen that happen, too.  I wouldn't recommend Broadcom gear, either.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos