SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

July 2013

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Brown, Chris (GE Healthcare)" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Brown, Chris (GE Healthcare)
Date:
Wed, 3 Jul 2013 20:52:01 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
Yes, jumbo frames were enabled and the following networking tuning was applied ;-)

net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 4096 65536 16777216
net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 4096 87380 16777216
net.core.wmem_max = 16777216
net.core.rmem_max = 16777216
net.core.wmem_default = 65536
net.core.rmem_default = 87380
net.core.netdev_max_backlog = 30000

- Chris
________________________________________
From: Adrian Sevcenco [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 2:10 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc: Brown, Chris (GE Healthcare)
Subject: Re: KVM + NFS Performance (ZFS/BTRFS/EXT4)

On 07/03/2013 09:23 PM, Brown, Chris (GE Healthcare) wrote:
> -- Test Config #8 --
> Max Read: 652.4
> Max Write: 670.4
are you sure you used 9k frames in your network configuration?
I am very interested in your results and work (many thanks btw for
sharing) and i heard about better results with jumbo frames..

Thanks!
Adrian

ATOM RSS1 RSS2