GigE & IDE throughput!
From: Coenraad Loubser (c10u_at_ananzi.co.za)
Date: 04/19/05
- Next message: Coenraad Loubser: "Re: Samba and Gigabit Ethernet"
- Previous message: jafar: "Re: Please Help! DSL Problems"
- In reply to: prg: "Re: Samba and Gigabit Ethernet"
- Next in thread: David Schwartz: "Re: Samba and Gigabit Ethernet"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 23:30:55 +0200
prg wrote:
> Chuck Forsberg wrote:
>
>>I have XP on a 2.4 P4 talking to Fedora Core 3 on a 2.0 Celeron
>>connected by 100 MHz Ethernet. XP accesses Samba shares on
>>Linux.
>
>
> Do you know your current throughput with 100Mbps? How close does it
> crowd your hard disk throughput? At clients? At server? Where's the
> bottleneck?
>
Well, lets see. IDE throughput is effectively 20MiB-60MiB/s. Thats
~160mbits to 480mbits. So I suppose that means that you can boot a PC
over the lan just as fast as from a fixed disc?
Hmm, so what about a pc with 2-3-4GB of ram, a ramdisk, with the lan
bootable OS, such as XP or Linux.
The bottleneck for booting up a PC is the disk speed. Mostly.
So you should be able to boot XP, I would guess, half the time, if you
boot from a ramdisk over gigabit ethernet!
Well--- that is if the speed is closer to 800mbits!
Anyone got any actual throughput measurements?
Google:
Two way to increase performance
Increase the minimum packet length
Decrease the distance span
Multiple transmissions arriving simultaneously results in all packets
being lost for a typical hub
Ouch, this particular test peaked 160Mbits.
Ooh, another test - FreeBSD makes linux look like windows when it comes
to lan performance and throughput at gigabit levels! Wow!
Shit people, I cant find any gigabit bandwidth measurements exceeding
160Mbps! Do I have to test EVERYTHING myself? Will do a measurement and
post it here..
Well Well. http://sd.wareonearth.com/~phil/jumbo.html says you should
use "Jumbo frames" (9000 bytes instead of 1500!) This halves your cpu
usage and adds 30% to your thoughput. Dont think its compatible with
slower networks though, but its not a bad trade! You cant go bigger than
12000 bytes packets because of the CRC field. (Haha, IPv6 has got a 4GB
packet size limit! Geeez!)
>
>>How much faster would Gigabit Ethernet?
>
>
> See above and realize that _many_ people are "satisfied" with only
> 300-400Mbps on the wire. Will that exceed your disk throughput? Solve
> your problems?
>
>
>>Does Linux support the cheap gigabit ethernet boards?
>
>
> Depends on the chipset(s) used on the nic(s). Can also depend on any
> switches/routers along the pathway. Cheaper cards stress the OS/cpu
> more than "server" grade cards which offer more on card
> processing/memory.
>
> GigE generates _lots_ of hardware interrupts and can really stress a
> machine if not properly set up. "Tweaking" the setup so it _is_ proper
> is more work than many people are willing to persue. Don't expect
> miracles or a painless upgrade path. This is why so many folks settle
> for ~350Mbps.
GigE being Gigabit Ethernet obviously!
>
> What hardware do you currently have on hand? Willing to replace any of
> it? Use Goolge to see how Linux supports your current hardware in a
> GigE network. What do you expect GigE to provide that your current
> setup does not? More speed? Greater reliability? Easier setup?
> Easier troubleshooting?
>
> If you already have all the pieces, just try it out and see what you
> get.
>
> If you are thinking of buying new toys, I usually tell people not to
> bother unless they have a bandwidth problem that they think GigE will
> solve/lessen.
>
> If you're willing to experiment and want to learn, go ahead ;)
>
> good luck,
> prg
>
- Next message: Coenraad Loubser: "Re: Samba and Gigabit Ethernet"
- Previous message: jafar: "Re: Please Help! DSL Problems"
- In reply to: prg: "Re: Samba and Gigabit Ethernet"
- Next in thread: David Schwartz: "Re: Samba and Gigabit Ethernet"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
