On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Sami Halabi wrote:
> 3. there some point of improved performance (without fw) that went down
> again somewhere before Clang got prod.
Found it !
It's commit 242402: "Rework the known mutexes..."
ministat -s 242401.forwarding 242402.forwarding
x 242401.forwarding
On 4/24/2013 6:45 AM, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote:
> # Why all these benchs ? #
>
> I've found performance regression regarding packet forwarding/ipfw/pf
> speed on -current comparing to 9.1 on my old server.
BTW, how much of a drop in performance as compared to 9.1 ?
---Mike
--
--
On 4/24/13 6:45 PM, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote:
Hi all,
here is the result of my simple-and-dummy bench script regarding
forwarding/ipfw/pf performance evolution on -current on a single-core
server with one flow only.
It's the result of more than 810 bench tests (including reboot between
each)
On 24 April 2013 12:11, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 24 April 2013 14:57, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
>
> I believe so, and it should get merged there as well.
rrs - prty please? :)
adrian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org maili
On 24 April 2013 14:57, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
I believe so, and it should get merged there as well.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any ma
Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
(Since people do still run it, and it seems a simple enough fix?)
adrian
On 24 April 2013 11:50, Randall Stewart wrote:
> All
>
> Ok I fixed it ;-)
>
> Its in SVN r249848.
>
> I will see about getting it to 9 stable, 8 stable and maybe even
> 8.4 if RE will let
All
Ok I fixed it ;-)
Its in SVN r249848.
I will see about getting it to 9 stable, 8 stable and maybe even
8.4 if RE will let me ;-)
R
On Apr 23, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Tom Evans wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Randall Stewart wrote:
>> Ok
>>
>> I too have been struck by this *multiple*
Hello.
I hope someone can help me with the following problem...
The box runs a 8.3p7/i386 and has three physical ethernet interfaces:
em0, em1 and fxp1.
em0 and em1 are bonded into lagg0, over which carp0 and carp1 run.
fxp0 has three vlans: vlan1, vlan2 and vlan3, over which there are
respect
On 24.04.2013 12:45, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote:
Hi all,
here is the result of my simple-and-dummy bench script regarding
forwarding/ipfw/pf performance evolution on -current on a single-core
server with one flow only.
It's the result of more than 810 bench tests (including reboot between
each)
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Sami Halabi wrote:
> Oliver,
> Great and impressive job.
Thanks,
> 3. there some point of improved performance (without fw) that went down
> again somewhere before Clang got prod.
=> Yes, I'm still working on detected the commit that create this degradation.
>
Oliver,
Great and impressive job.
If I interpret the plot as is the result say (approximatly of course):
1. Forwarding using ipfw with single rule degrades ~25% the pps.
2. Forwarding with pf however gets ~50%+ of degredation if performance pps.
3. there some point of improved performance (without
Hi all,
here is the result of my simple-and-dummy bench script regarding
forwarding/ipfw/pf performance evolution on -current on a single-core
server with one flow only.
It's the result of more than 810 bench tests (including reboot between
each) done twice for validating my methodology.
# Discla
12 matches
Mail list logo
