From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:30:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:30:33 -0500 Received: from smtpgw.bnl.gov ([130.199.3.16]:60946 "EHLO smtpgw.sec.bnl.local") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:30:26 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:29:38 -0500 From: Tim Sailer To: "Craig I. Hagan" Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jfung@bnl.gov Subject: Re: Network Performance? Message-ID: <20010109102938.B28548@bnl.gov> In-Reply-To: <20010108090644.A12440@bnl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i In-Reply-To: ; from hagan@cih.com on Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 01:40:57PM -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 01:40:57PM -0500, Craig I. Hagan wrote: > > 101 packets transmitted, 101 packets received, 0% packet loss > > round-trip min/avg/max = 109.6/110.3/112.2 ms > > > > > Does the problem occur in both directions? > > > > Good question. I'll find out. > > > > > Are you _sure_ the window size is being set correctly? How > > > is it being set? > > > > I'm fairly sure. We echo the value to the file. catting it back > > shows the correct value. If we go lower than default, it slows > > down even more. > > what are you setting it to on the solaris machine? what window > sizes have you tried? > > Your pipe looks like it will have quite a few bits in flight due to its Yup. That's why the tuning. WAN performance here is very important. > latency. From my quick guess math, which sucks, it appears that you can fit 1.2 > to 1.5 megabytes on the wire (100mbit machine<-> machine) times 100-120ms wire Hmm. 100/8 is about 12, no? > time. This is a rather large number, so you may want to see what hosts really > support, perhaps starting with 64k or 128k and work up. Make sure that you have > window scaling turned on if you go with very large windows. Yes, we have that enabled too. > Also, have you upped your socket buffers to match your window sizes? We are using straight ftp for the testing. > Last, solaris tends to have poorly tuned tcp values out of the box, look at > this link and tune the solaris stack to better reflect reality. > http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.rvs.uni-hannover.de/people/voeckler/tune/EN/tune.html+%2Bwan+%2Bwindow+%2Bscale+%2Bsize+%2Bnetwork&hl=en > > linux tuning has a decent amount of data in the docs section of the kernel > sources. I'll take a look. THanks. Tim -- Tim Sailer Cyber Security Operations Brookhaven National Laboratory (631) 344-3001 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/