On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:35:26 -0700 Bryan Whitehead <driver at megahappy.net> wrote: > GigE is slower. Here is ping from same boxes but using the 1GigE cards: > > [root at node0.cloud ~]# ping -c 10 10.100.0.11 > PING 10.100.0.11 (10.100.0.11) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.628 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.283 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.307 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.275 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.313 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.278 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.309 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.197 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.267 ms > 64 bytes from 10.100.0.11: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.187 ms > > --- 10.100.0.11 ping statistics --- > 10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9000ms > rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.187/0.304/0.628/0.116 ms > > Note: The Infiniband interfaces have a constant load of traffic from > glusterfs. The Nic cards comparatively have very little traffic. Uh, you should throw away your GigE switch. Example: # ping 192.168.83.1 PING 192.168.83.1 (192.168.83.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.310 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.199 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.119 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.115 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.099 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.082 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.091 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.096 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.097 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.095 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=0.097 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=0.102 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=0.103 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=0.108 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=0.098 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=0.093 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=0.099 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=0.102 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=0.092 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=0.111 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=0.112 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=0.099 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=0.092 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=0.102 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.83.1: icmp_seq=25 ttl=64 time=0.108 ms ^C --- 192.168.83.1 ping statistics --- 25 packets transmitted, 25 received, 0% packet loss, time 23999ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.082/0.112/0.310/0.047 ms That is _loaded_. -- Regards, Stephan
