[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f45c281f37724eec868ae72180ab3cdd@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 10:04:53 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Konstantin Kharlamov' <hi-angel@...dex.ru>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: On 5.6.2, SCTP is 10 000 times slower than TCP
From: Konstantin Kharlamov
> Sent: 09 April 2020 15:09
>
> I was considering, whether SCTP could be faster than TCP, and made some
> measurements.
SCTP will always be slower than TCP - it is much more complicated.
Additionally it is much harder to fill ethernet frames - which makes
it even slower.
Not to mention the slower checksum algorithm.
- I can add more...
IMHO even protocols like M3UA would run better over TCP.
> Results are astonishing: 4.74 GB/sec for TCP vs 590, KB/sec for
> SCTP. Let me rephrase: that is 4.74 GB/sec vs 0.00059 GB/sec! Wow. This looks
> sooo wrong, that this is probably a bug, so I'm reporting it here.
It shouldn't be that much slower though.
> Tests are done on kernel 5.6.2 with qperf 0.4.11 as follows:
>
> 1. Run `qperf` in one terminal
> 2. Run `qperf -v localhost tcp_bw tcp_lat sctp_bw sctp_lat` in the other terminal
>
> Below are 4 results for my Dell Inspiron 5767 laptop.
>
> Test number | TCP bandwidth | TCP latency, μs | SCTP bandwidth | SCTP latency, μs
> 1 | 4.74 GB/sec | 6.81 | 590, KB/sec | 11.8
> 2 | 5 GB/sec | 6.79 | 721, KB/sec | 10.5
> 3 | 4.73 GB/sec | 6.76 | 8.39, MB/sec | 10.9
> 4 | 5.7 GB/sec | 6.1 | 53.4, MB/sec | 9.33
There is something strange going on, the latency is reasonable.
> FWIW, I also made some measurements on a server hw with older kernel 4.19. The
> difference there is not that big, yet even there SCTP is twice as slower compared
> to TCP.
That wouldn't surprise me.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists