Re: [Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-06 Thread Aaron Turner
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Peter Van Epp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >As noted a gigabit light path, doing within 5 megabits per second Oh... for some reason I thought you were running a 10G link... carry on. :) -- Aaron Turner http://synfin.net/ http://tcpreplay.synfin.net/ - Pcap

Re: [Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-06 Thread Peter Van Epp
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 12:22:40PM -0700, Aaron Turner wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Peter Van Epp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >> Since he's using the memory cache and a pretty sizeable loop count, > >> it's probably not disk I/O. I'm guessing most of it is overhead of > >> d

Re: [Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-06 Thread Aaron Turner
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Peter Van Epp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> Since he's using the memory cache and a pretty sizeable loop count, >> it's probably not disk I/O. I'm guessing most of it is overhead of >> doing 500K write()'s per second. >> >> When you're getting 995Mbps, I doubt

Re: [Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-06 Thread Peter Van Epp
> > Since he's using the memory cache and a pretty sizeable loop count, > it's probably not disk I/O. I'm guessing most of it is overhead of > doing 500K write()'s per second. > > When you're getting 995Mbps, I doubt your average packet size is 102 > bytes like Jeff's. If it is, then I'd love

Re: [Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-06 Thread Levesque, Jeff
Thanks for your help guys. I'll try to find some more pcaps with larger packet sizes and see if I get a higher throughput. -Original Message- From: Aaron Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 12:31 AM To: Main forum for tcpreplay Subject: Re: [Tcpreplay-

Re: [Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-04 Thread Aaron Turner
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Peter Van Epp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Doesn't appear to be a network issue. All packets presented appear > to have been sent without delay of complaints about lack of buffer space. > That points at disk (which is, assuming a properly configured network) u

Re: [Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-04 Thread Peter Van Epp
Doesn't appear to be a network issue. All packets presented appear to have been sent without delay of complaints about lack of buffer space. That points at disk (which is, assuming a properly configured network) usually the bottleneck anyway. A couple of suggestions: use iperf/netperf betwe

Re: [Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-04 Thread Aaron Turner
Hey Jeff, Looking at your numbers I see you're getting nearly half a million packets/sec. That's pretty damn good for no hardware acceleration IMHO.. Of course, even at that rate, if you're sending really small packets, the math doesn't work out in your favor if you're looking for large Mbps. -

[Tcpreplay-users] Performance Question

2008-10-03 Thread Levesque, Jeff
Hi, I was hoping someone could help me figure out why I'm getting the numbers I have. I'm using a 10Gb fiber link but I can't get any replays to even 1Gb. Output and system specs are listed below. Thanks, - Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] tcpreplay-3.3.2]# tcpreplay -i eth2 -t