From: Bruce Allen <ballen@gravity.phys.uwm.edu>
To: SANGTAE HA <sangtae.ha@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: e1000 full-duplex TCP performance well below wire speed
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:52:13 -0600 (CST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0801310240210.3240@trinity.phys.uwm.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <649aecc70801301617m6331bcb8i8ce60366e182c739@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Sangtae,
Thanks for joining this discussion -- it's good to a CUBIC author and
expert here!
>> In our application (cluster computing) we use a very tightly coupled
>> high-speed low-latency network. There is no 'wide area traffic'. So
>> it's hard for me to understand why any networking components or
>> software layers should take more than milliseconds to ramp up or back
>> off in speed. Perhaps we should be asking for a TCP congestion
>> avoidance algorithm which is designed for a data center environment
>> where there are very few hops and typical packet delivery times are
>> tens or hundreds of microseconds. It's very different than delivering
>> data thousands of km across a WAN.
> If your network latency is low, regardless of type of protocols should
> give you more than 900Mbps.
Yes, this is also what I had thought.
In the graph that we posted, the two machines are connected by an ethernet
crossover cable. The total RTT of the two machines is probably AT MOST a
couple of hundred microseconds. Typically it takes 20 or 30 microseconds
to get the first packet out the NIC. Travel across the wire is a few
nanoseconds. Then getting the packet into the receiving NIC might be
another 20 or 30 microseconds. The ACK should fly back in about the same
time.
> I can guess the RTT of two machines is less than 4ms in your case and I
> remember the throughputs of all high-speed protocols (including
> tcp-reno) were more than 900Mbps with 4ms RTT. So, my question which
> kernel version did you use with your broadcomm NIC and got more than
> 900Mbps?
We are going to double-check this (we did the broadcom testing about two
months ago). Carsten is going to re-run the broadcomm experiments later
today and will then post the results.
You can see results from some testing on crossover-cable wired systems
with broadcomm NICs, that I did about 2 years ago, here:
http://www.lsc-group.phys.uwm.edu/beowulf/nemo/design/SMC_8508T_Performance.html
You'll notice that total TCP throughput on the crossover cable was about
220 MB/sec. With TCP overhead this is very close to 2Gb/s.
> I have two machines connected by a gig switch and I can see what happens
> in my environment. Could you post what parameters did you use for
> netperf testing?
Carsten will post these in the next few hours. If you want to simplify
further, you can even take away the gig switch and just use a crossover
cable.
> and also if you set any parameters for your testing, please post them
> here so that I can see that happens to me as well.
Carsten will post all the sysctl and ethtool parameters shortly.
Thanks again for chiming in. I am sure that with help from you, Jesse, and
Rick, we can figure out what is going on here, and get it fixed.
Cheers,
Bruce
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-31 8:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-30 9:51 Bruce Allen
2008-01-30 13:18 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-30 13:38 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-30 14:08 ` David Miller
2008-01-30 13:53 ` David Miller
2008-01-30 14:01 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-30 16:21 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-01-30 22:25 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-30 22:33 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-01-30 23:23 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-31 0:17 ` SANGTAE HA
2008-01-31 8:52 ` Bruce Allen [this message]
2008-01-31 11:45 ` Bill Fink
2008-01-31 14:50 ` David Acker
2008-01-31 15:57 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-31 15:54 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-31 17:36 ` Bill Fink
2008-01-31 19:37 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-31 18:26 ` Brandeburg, Jesse
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.63.0801310240210.3240@trinity.phys.uwm.edu \
--to=ballen@gravity.phys.uwm.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sangtae.ha@gmail.com \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®