[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1182459607.6096.31.camel@raj-laptop>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:00:07 -0700
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
Cc: rick.jones2@...com, jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>,
Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@...ibm.com>,
Gagan Arneja <gaagaan@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@...a.slu.se>
Subject: Re: [WIP][PATCHES] Network xmit batching
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 17:21 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 07:43:49AM -0400, jamal (hadi@...erus.ca) wrote:
> > Folks, we need help. Please run this on different hardware. Evgeniy, i
> > thought this kind of stuff excites you, no? ;-> (wink, wink).
> > Only the sender needs the patch but the receiver must be a more powerful
> > machine (so that it is not the bottleneck).
>
> I've ran several simple tests with desktop e1000 adapter I managed to
> find.
>
> Test machine is amd athlon64 3500+ with 1gb of ram.
> Another point is dektop core duo 3.4 ghz with 2 gb of ram and sky2
> driver.
>
> Simple test included test -> desktop and vice versa traffic with 128 and
> 4096 block size in netperf-2.4.3 setup.
Is that in conjunction with setting the test-specific -D to set
TCP_NODELAY, or was Nagle left-on? If the latter, perhaps timing issues
could be why the confidence intervals weren't hit since the relative
batching of 128byte sends into larger segments is something of a race.
rick jones
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists