netdev - kernel 2.4 vs 2.6 Traffic Controller performance

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9dbec86d0710022314o6db2b0baua6db543d52f312b6@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 3 Oct 2007 14:14:50 +0800
From:	Sonny <smaniaol@...il.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: kernel 2.4 vs 2.6 Traffic Controller performance

Hello
This is a repost, there seems to have a misunderstanding before.

I hope this is the right place to ask this. Does any know if there is a
substantial difference in the performance of the traffic controller
between kernel 2.4 and 2.6. We tested it using 1 iperf server and use
250 and 500 clients, altering the burst.

This is the set-up:
iperf client -  router (w/ traffic controller) - iperf server

We use the top command inside the router to check the idle time of our
router to see this. The results we got from the 2.4 kernel shows
around 65-70% idle time while the 2.6 shows
60-65% idle time. We tried to use MRTG and we're not getting any
results either. We want to know if we could improve the bandwidth by
upgrading the kernel, else we would have to get a new bandwidth
manager.  Have anyone performed a similar test or can suggest a better
way to do this. Thanks in advance.
-
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