Hi Alfredo, This is our current version:
v.2.5.170109 [Enterprise/Professional Edition] Pro rev: r870 Built on: Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS We are likely to see up to 8-9Gbit/sec off traffic from ~1000 hosts. NTopng configuration: user@mon03:~$ cat /etc/ntopng/ntopng.conf -w=3000 -W=0 -g=-1 -F=es;flows;nprobe-%Y.%m.%d;http://localhost:9200/_bulk; -m=“138.0.0.0/22" -d=/storage/ntopng -G=/var/run/ntopng.pid -U=root -i=zc:eth4@0 -i=zc:eth4@1 -i=zc:eth4@2 -i=zc:eth4@3 -i=zc:eth4@4 -i=zc:eth4@5 -i=zc:eth4@6 -i=zc:eth4@7 -i=view:zc:eth4@0,zc:eth4@1,zc:eth4@2,zc:eth4@3,zc:eth4@4,zc:eth4@5,zc:eth4@6,zc:eth4@7 --online-license-check I also want to confirm that PF_RING ZC is working correctly: user@mon03:~$ cat /proc/net/pf_ring/info PF_RING Version : 6.5.0 (dev:b07e3297700d70c836a626beee697c8fc9fad019) Total rings : 9 Standard (non ZC) Options Ring slots : 4096 Slot version : 16 Capture TX : Yes [RX+TX] IP Defragment : No Socket Mode : Standard Cluster Fragment Queue : 0 Cluster Fragment Discard : 0 user@mon03:~$ cat /proc/net/pf_ring/dev/eth4/info Name: eth4 Index: 8 Address: 00:1B:21:A4:86:10 Polling Mode: NAPI/ZC Type: Ethernet Family: Intel ixgbe 82599 TX Queues: 12 RX Queues: 12 Num RX Slots: 32768 Num TX Slots: 32768 Does the above indicate the device is actually running in ZC mode even though the polling mode says “NAPI/ZC”? The documentation seems to be out of date with regard to confirming the NIC is actually running in ZC mode. A regular TCPDump on eth4 shows no packets (i assume this is correct as the kernel shouldn’t be receiving packets) but ifconfig counters for eth4 seem to still be increasing - is this correct when the packets shouldn’t be seen by the kernel? Also, with the change from an 8-core VM to a 12-core bare mental hosts, PF_RING is now using 12 Queues, is this the default behaviour to increase the queues to the number of processor cores? Regards, Tim > On 10 Jan 2017, at 4:19 am, Alfredo Cardigliano <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Tim > I just realised you are using ntop (I guess you mean ntopng) for processing > traffic, I thought you were running performance tests with PF_RING, > please provide a few more info about your configuration: > - ntopng version > - ntopng configuration > - traffic rate (pps and gbps) > > Best Regards > Alfredo > >> On 8 Jan 2017, at 23:29, Tim Raphael <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> These are our n2membenchmarks: >> >> user@mon03:~$ sudo n2membenchmark >> 43368699.838202 pps/22.204774 Gbps >> 42639209.533752 pps/21.831275 Gbps >> 42501135.455717 pps/21.760581 Gbps >> 43745856.911580 pps/22.397879 Gbps >> 35157099.401825 pps/18.000434 Gbps >> 32567529.758572 pps/16.674576 Gbps >> 43278821.125976 pps/22.158756 Gbps >> 42753771.110469 pps/21.889931 Gbps >> >> This is on bare metal with ~32GB RAM and 12 Cores on a Hex-core with HT >> enabled. >> >> I plan on running ~ 8 Virtual NIC queues to keep 4 cores free - thoughts? >> >> - Tim >> >> >> >>> On 5 Jan 2017, at 10:18 pm, Tim Raphael <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Alfredo, >>> >>> The installed NTop application is currently in a VM however the numademo >>> numbers were generated via a live CD (an easy way to test performance >>> without flattening the host). >>> The R520 has 12 RAM slots, we’re filled the 6 (in triple-channel >>> configuration) associated with the filled processor. >>> I’ll have a crack at the n2membenchmark tool and let you know. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 5 Jan 2017, at 10:12 pm, Alfredo Cardigliano <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Tim >>>> how many RAM slots did you fill in practice? “All” or “all channels”? >>>> Please run n2membenchmark, included in the n2disk package, which is our >>>> benchmarking tool and let us see some output. >>>> Are you running a VM on this R520 or a native OS? >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>>> On 5 Jan 2017, at 14:37, Tim Raphael <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi All, >>>>> >>>>> We have a Dell R520 with a single processor (and one empty slot) and all >>>>> the associated RAM slots filled. >>>>> numademo shows we can do 14,000MB/s which is apparently a little short of >>>>> the 16,000MB/s required for line rate 10Gbit PF_RING NTop analysis. >>>>> >>>>> Is there anything else we can do with the hardware to up potential >>>>> performance? >>>>> >>>>> We have previously installed NTop with PF_RING on a VM on a dedicated >>>>> R710 (dual Proc, 24GB RAM) and could only do 4Gbit/s tops. >>>>> In the case of the R520, we don’t have to worry about NUMA allocation as >>>>> there is only one CPU, all the correct RAM slots are filled and the PCIe >>>>> slot the NIC is using is directly connected to the CPU filled. >>>>> >>>>> Would it be worth installing NTop on bare metal? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Ntop mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ntop mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ntop mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop > > _______________________________________________ > Ntop mailing list > [email protected] > http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop _______________________________________________ Ntop mailing list [email protected] http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop
