On 1 Dec 2016, at 17:57, Allan Jude wrote:
> On 2016-12-01 18:55, Jordan Caraballo wrote:
>> Feedback and/or tips and tricks more than welcome.
>>
>> We are trying to process huge amounts of small (64 bytes) pps through a
>> router. So far results have not been as we expected. We have tested
>>
Hi,
If I'm getting it right, you are doing a test with 10 machines directly
connected on the same LAN, using iperf to test the performance of the
TCP/IP stack with your 10Gbit cards.
But as far as I can see, netmap is not involved in your setup, you are not
using it, aren't you?
IOW , I don't und
Hi,
I have run some performance tests but not as router, which is your case, so
some information might not be relevant:
0. validate your hw stats with what you get from the output
1. Try using FLOWTABLE option in your kernel config - this may kill your
machine in -CURRENT, but it's worth checking
On 2016-12-01 18:55, Jordan Caraballo wrote:
> Feedback and/or tips and tricks more than welcome.
>
> We are trying to process huge amounts of small (64 bytes) pps through a
> router. So far results have not been as we expected. We have tested
> FreeBSD 10.3, 11.0, 11.0-STABLE, and 12.0-CURRENT wi
How have you configured netmap-fwd? If you provide details on how the
router or firewall is setup I can try similar experiments here.
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Jordan Caraballo
wrote:
> Feedback and/or tips and tricks more than welcome.
>
> We are trying to process huge amounts of small (6
Feedback and/or tips and tricks more than welcome.
We are trying to process huge amounts of small (64 bytes) pps through a
router. So far results have not been as we expected. We have tested
FreeBSD 10.3, 11.0, 11.0-STABLE, and 12.0-CURRENT with and without
netmap. Based on netmap documentation w
