[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18b669d80804240606n47854939x94278f8d974034c1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:06:11 +0900
From: "Shigeo N" <shigeonx@...il.com>
To: "Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: XTP for 2.6.25
Now I have connected 2 hosts directly, and evaluate the each throughput.
Then all the results of UDP, TCP and XTP are the same and 94Mbps. (My
netwrok is 100Base/TX).
In this case round-trip time between 2 hosts is less than 0.1ms
because they are directly connected. But my previouse case, round-trip
time between 2 hosts are 4ms. (I use IPSEC between the security
gateways to increase delay).
I think that's the reason TCP throughput is slow. If ACK packets are
delayed, sending window cannot slide and sending packets cannot be
fully bursted.
If I changes wmem size through /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_wmem, TCP's
throughput may improve, but congestion control becomes more difficult
for TCP.
That is TCP's disadvantage to XTP.
Best
Shigeo
On 4/24/08, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> "Shigeo N" <shigeonx@...il.com> writes:
> >
> > I tested in the network where UDP throughput is 29Mbps, then TCP
> > throughput was 13Mbps, but XTP's reached to 25Mbps.
>
> One interesting question is why TCP was so much slower than UDP
> on your test. It shouldn't be on a fair test setup.
>
> Please post details. Was the network losing packets?
>
> New protocols might be interesting, but even more interesting is to
> fix any (real) problems in existing protocols.
>
> -Andi
>
--
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