On 24 aug 2011, at 19:13, Tomas Bodzar wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Per-Olov Sjvholm <p...@incedo.org> wrote: >> On 23 aug 2011, at 19:30, Tomas Bodzar wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Per-Olov Sjvholm <p...@incedo.org> wrote: >>>> On 23 aug 2011, at 10:54, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote: >>>>> Le Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:49:47 +0200, >>>>> Per-Olov SjC6holm <p...@incedo.org> a C)crit : >>>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>>> Have not tried current, but will try current as soon as I can. >>>>>> Also... I will try to do some laborations with CPU speed of the core >>>>>> the OpenBSD virtual machine has. This to see how the interrupts and >>>>>> throughput is related to the CPU speed of the allocated core. >>>>> >>>>> It would be nice to know if current is better with Intel em(4) cards. >>>>> because of this commit : http://freshbsd.org/2011/04/13/00/19/01 >>>>> >>>>> Here we reach 400 MBits/s with a CPU rate ~70% but we >>>>> run OpenBSD 4.9. >>>>> >>>>> Regards. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> How fast is your CPU ? >>>> >>>> Yes I can see the 1.254 commit with this came in after the 4.9 release that >> I >>>> use. I can try to see if I can measure any performance gain with this >> update. >>>> >>>> I will try this from aug 17... >>>> http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/os/OpenBSD/snapshots/i386/install50.iso >>> >>> Can't see that mirror here http://www.openbsd.org/ftp.html , it's >>> better to use something more official >>> >>>> >>>> I4ll get back.... >>>> >>>> [ YES !! More fun tests.... :D ] >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Per-Olov >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> Have tried it now... I tried the 5.0 snapshot from aug 17 with the improved em >> driver. Also tested with more allocated cores and the SMP kernel. >> >> Result on 5.0 snapshot with improved em driver: >> >> - SMP >> worse. Really sucks! _Dramatically_ reduced throughput. > > Will be fine to see systat ; systat mbufs ; netstat -m ; vmstat -i and > compare them with previous version. Including dmesg (if something > changed in dmesg) > >> >> - One processor core (as most of my tests have used) >> An improvement, but very little. Maybe 10% better > > As stated in some of links and posts sent to you - SMP doesn't offer > better throughput/sped automatically. You need to test on i386 > non-SMP/SMP and amd64 non-SMP/SMP to see what's best. > >> >> >> /Per-Olov >> >>
YES, YES and YES again !!!!!!! I have done a huge mistake during my tests. To much kernel copying... The result was that the kernel with disabled mpbios was /bsd.old. Very embarrassing. I have now a throughput of no less than 560Mbit / s. And that is through the VIRTUAL firewall with more than 50% IDLE CPU. Y e e e e e e s s ! How is really possible. But it is... ### Summary: ### - KVM virtualized STOCK OpenBSD 4.9 + Stable updates + sysctl.conf tuning + disabled mpbios. running uniprocesor kernel - 324 rows PF ruleset - 2 "Intel PRO/1000 MT (82574L)" desktop NICs used through PCI passthrough from the KVM virtualization host - OpenBSD have got 512MB RAM, One CPU core from host (Xeon 5504 2.0Ghz) Test: An "SCP" with the crypto overhead (default crypto) you get from A 64 bit SuseLinux through the firewall to my Macbook pro (quadcore i7 2.2GHz 8GM RAM, OCZ-Vertex 3 SSD disk). Several tests with DVD ISO files between 3-6 GB i size. 540Mbit was the _lowest_ average speed in the test and 560 Mbit / s was the highest ############# I am really satisfied with this. I was going to test FreeBSD beta 9 with its PF 4.5 just for fun. But I will skip that when the results ended up this good. OpenBSD really indeed perform V E R Y well in this area. Per-Olov
