|
On 01/08/2013 11:26 PM, jason wrote:
Update : By using iperf to check multicast performance, iperf
also give a bad result(100Mbit/sec) on my virtual machine, but
CPU usage is very low(only 1%). The command I used is :
iperf -c 239.255.1.10 -u -l 8K -b 1G -w -i 5 -t 300 -T 4
Jason,
Unfortunately the virtual network drivers perform very poorly with
multicast. Multicast is not a operational mode the authors of those
operating system drivers have optimized. You might try udpu which
uses unicast (which has been optimized), although I can't guarantee
performance will be great either.
Most of the development of Corosync is on bare metal and optimized
for that environment.
Totem uses alot of CPU to operate, especially with encryption. The
usage may be higher depending on how many cpu cores you have and
which version you are using. 1.4.x uses threads, which cause some
context switching chaos - so more cores here would be helpful. I'd
recommend giving 2.x a try if you haven't.
Regards
-steve
On Jan 9, 2013 1:57 PM, "jason" < huzhijiang@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi Jan,
Between our two virtual machines, iperf -i 1 -w 1M can
reach line rate that is 1.00 Gbit/sec. But I do not know why
cpgbench only got 10 MB/s. And when cpgbench was running,
top showed it used up almost one CPU. 30% in usermode, 70%
for in kernel mode.
On Dec 10, 2012 3:28 PM, "Jan
Friesse" < jfriesse@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Jason,
jason napsal(a):
> Hi All,
> Currently we created a 16 nodes(virtuallization)
cluser environment to test
cool
> the performance of the Totem protocol. We wan to see
the relationship
> between the cluster size(the amount of nodes ) and
the bandwidth/latency.
After you will finish testing, can you please share
results?
> And I found there are already some test utilities
that I can use such as
> cpgbench, evtbench and pload and I want to know
which tool is the best
> that I should use to meet my requirement and is there
any other way to test
Question is, what type of performance you would like to
test. Is that
bandwidth, or latency? Network or local one? cpgbench
seems to be
generally best for testing both bandwidth (with big
messages) and
latency (with small messages). I would not recommend
pload, because this
makes corosync to behave weird (it's almost removed in
2.x).
Honza
> such performance?
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
