On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Vijay Chander wrote:
> Jesse,
> To add to Juan's points, we are not power users of OVS. All we need is a DMAC
> based switching of packets paying attention to VLAN ids.
>
> Short lived/long lived flows happen at L4 level which we don't want OVS to
> pay attention
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Juan Tellez wrote:
> Jesse,
>
>> I don't really see anything in the information that you've given that
>> indicates OVS is the one dropping packets
>
> We do not see the same problem with the Linux Bridge, and we want to use the
> vswitch.
>
> Is it possible that o
2 9:20 AM
> To: Juan Tellez
> Cc: discuss@openvswitch.org; Vijay Chander
> Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] xenServer and openVswitch 1.0.99
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Juan Tellez wrote:
> > Jesse,
> >
> >>>> What's the traffic mixture like when you have th
---
From: Jesse Gross [mailto:je...@nicira.com]
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 9:20 AM
To: Juan Tellez
Cc: discuss@openvswitch.org; Vijay Chander
Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] xenServer and openVswitch 1.0.99
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Juan Tellez wrote:
> Jesse,
>
>>>> What&#
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Juan Tellez wrote:
> Jesse,
>
What's the traffic mixture like when you have this problem with vlans
(i.e. single flow vs. many connections)? If you run a single stream, what
is the ratio of hits to misses on the relevant datapath?
>
> Our traffic
ruary 02, 2012 6:36 PM
To: Juan Tellez
Cc: discuss@openvswitch.org; Vijay Chander
Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] xenServer and openVswitch 1.0.99
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Juan Tellez wrote:
> Jesse,
>
> Dmesg hasn't changed for a while .. and sadly it is not time-stamped. Below
>
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Juan Tellez wrote:
> Jesse,
>
> Dmesg hasn't changed for a while .. and sadly it is not time-stamped. Below
> is the tail:
>
> ..
> device vif467.1 entered promiscuous mode
> device tap467.0 entered promiscuous mode
> device tap467.1 entered promiscuous mode
> /lo
ailto:je...@nicira.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 5:54 PM
To: Juan Tellez
Cc: discuss@openvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] xenServer and openVswitch 1.0.99
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Juan Tellez wrote:
> We also suspect vswitchd as responsible for dropping packets.
>
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Juan Tellez wrote:
> We also suspect vswitchd as responsible for dropping packets.
>
>
>
> 39: RX packets:494125 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>
> 40: TX packets:519707 errors:0 dropped:8357 overruns:0
> carrier:0
>
> 46:
into a HotFix.
Thanks,
Juan
-Original Message-
From: Ben Pfaff [mailto:b...@nicira.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 5:20 PM
To: Juan Tellez
Cc: discuss@openvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] xenServer and openVswitch 1.0.99
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 01:18:35AM +, Juan T
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 01:18:35AM +, Juan Tellez wrote:
> XenServer 6.0 is currently running 1.0.99 OpenVswitch.
>
> We see excessive CPU consumption by ovs-vswitchd when running vlan traffic:
Citrix released a hotfix for that problem.
___
discuss
XenServer 6.0 is currently running 1.0.99 OpenVswitch.
We see excessive CPU consumption by ovs-vswitchd when running vlan traffic:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND
6814 root 10 -10 16692 11m 1044 R 89.2 0.4 3339:02 ovs-vswitchd
1617 root 20 0
12 matches
Mail list logo
