[48053] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Linux routing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anthony D Cennami)
Wed May 22 08:23:09 2002
Message-ID: <3CEB8CF8.6060805@netscape.net>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 08:20:08 -0400
From: Anthony D Cennami <acennami@netscape.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ralph@istop.com
Cc: Peter van Dijk <peter@dataloss.nl>,
"nanog@merit.edu" <nanog@merit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
You might want to try Zebra and some actual traffic, rather than an
extremely CPU intensive compression program. Compressing a file, even
in swap, is by no means a good way to judge the aggregate throughput and
routing capabilities of a system, regardless of the OS or platform.
(That is unless you were planning on bzip2'ing all of your packet flows.)
ralph@istop.com wrote:
>>On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 06:34:47PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>>
>>>I don't really trust the vmstat system time numbers. Based on some
>>>suggestions I received, I ran some CPU intensive benchmarks during
>>>different traffic loads, and determined how much system time was being
>>>used by comparing the real and user times. The results seem to show that
>>>if I want to do 50Mbps full-duplex on 2 ports (200M aggregate) that the
>>>standard Linux 2.2.20 routing code won't cut it.
>>>
>>[snip bogus benchmark]
>>
>>Why are you benchmarking network troughput by bzip2'ing a file in
>>/tmp? It makes no sense.
>>
>
> interrupts are taking up CPU time, and vmstat is not accurately reporting
> it. I need *something* compute intensive to infer load by seeing how many
> cycles are left over.
>
> -Ralph
>
>
>
