Thanks a lot Raja.As always thanks a lot for your help :) Regards, Kev
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Rajagopalan Sivaramakrishnan < r...@juniper.net> wrote: > If the VM does not use a DPDK application, there are VM exits when > forwarding packets, > > which kills performance. Also, segmentation/receive offloads (GRO, GSO) > are not supported > > by the DPDK vrouter in 3.0 (supported from 4.0), so that would also reduce > the TCP > > throughput. > > > > Raja > > > > *From: *Users <users-boun...@lists.opencontrail.org> on behalf of kevin > parrikar <kevin.parker...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 11:57 AM > *To: *dev <d...@lists.opencontrail.org>, "<users@lists.opencontrail.org>" < > users@lists.opencontrail.org> > *Subject: *[Users] dpdk vrouter performance > > > > hello All, > > i have contrail 3.0.* with DPDK vrouter running on 2 compute nodes with > 1Gbx100 hugepages and 6 dedicated CPU for the DPDK vrouter process in 1 > NUMA node. > > Created 2xUbuntu (16.04) 40Gb hugepage enabled vm with 6 dedicated VCPU in > same compute nodes (Jumbo frames enabled) > > when performing iperf between the vms i get a through put of 2 Gbps where > as vms on Non DPDK nodes i am getting 9Gbps. > > I assume vms running on DPDK nodes are not optimized and probably i need > to compile in DPDK Libraries and DPDK application to get improved > performance on Ubuntu16.04. > > My question is : > > with out DPDK libraries in guest why is the performance too low.Since qemu > process is set to share memory and i assume with this option all packets ll > be copied to guest memory by the dpdk vrouter. > > Thanks for your help > > Regards, > > Kev >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.opencontrail.org http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/users_lists.opencontrail.org
