similar to: Throughput problem with Samba 3.3.4 over VPN

Hi All, I have gone through threads related to throughput issue in this list. Found few similar issue, but could not get the solution. So looking for some advice from group. I am trying to use the samba to access a USB disk connected to our evaluation board which has xtensa core running at 400 MHz. Samba 3.5.x is running on the board. We are getting below throughput as tested with the

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 11:54:53AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 05:43:29PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > This series tries to increase the throughput of virtio-vsock with slight > > changes. > > While I was testing the v2 of this series I discovered an huge use of memory, > > so I added patch 1 to mitigate this issue. I put it in this

Hi Is there anyone who has successfully resolved the low throughput problem in Guest communication. I am using Xen3.4.1 with PV os kernel 2.6.30-rc6-tip On fedora11. While running netperf benchmark on guests throughput results are very low DomU to DomU    0.29 Mbps Why is it so? What would be the problem. Is there any issue with fc11 platform? Regards, Fasiha Ashraf Add whatever you love

I ran some iperf tests today and it looks like the etherbridge is the limiting factor on throughput. In the beforetime, I saw great throughput to the VMs; over 800 Mbps. With the bridge, the numbers are in the 400s somewhere. Is this the speed I can expect from the bridge? Is there some tuning I should try, or another way to get more bandwidth into the VMs? This is with xen-2.0, 2.4.27-xen0

greetings list. am serving SMB using the samba-3.0.24 package on an openbsd 4.1-release machine and am seeing really low throughput from the server, even when both the server and client are on gigabit ethernet. the maximum throughput i've been able to attain is ~6 MBps, which is pretty slow, both on 100 Mbps and 1 Gbps segments. this top speed is identical on both 100 Mbps and 1 Gbps.

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:27 AM, Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 2017?04?19? 04:21, Willem de Bruijn wrote: >> >> +static void virtnet_napi_tx_enable(struct virtnet_info *vi, >> + struct virtqueue *vq, >> + struct napi_struct *napi) >> +{ >> + if

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:27 AM, Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 2017?04?19? 04:21, Willem de Bruijn wrote: >> >> +static void virtnet_napi_tx_enable(struct virtnet_info *vi, >> + struct virtqueue *vq, >> + struct napi_struct *napi) >> +{ >> + if

>>> Maybe I was wrong, but according to Michael's comment it looks like he >>> want >>> check affinity_hint_set just for speculative tx polling on rx napi >>> instead >>> of disabling it at all. >>> >>> And I'm not convinced this is really needed, driver only provide affinity >>> hint instead of affinity, so it's

>>> Maybe I was wrong, but according to Michael's comment it looks like he >>> want >>> check affinity_hint_set just for speculative tx polling on rx napi >>> instead >>> of disabling it at all. >>> >>> And I'm not convinced this is really needed, driver only provide affinity >>> hint instead of affinity, so it's

This series tries to increase the throughput of virtio-vsock with slight changes. While I was testing the v2 of this series I discovered an huge use of memory, so I added patch 1 to mitigate this issue. I put it in this series in order to better track the performance trends. v5: - rebased all patches on net-next - added Stefan's R-b and Michael's A-b v4:

This series tries to increase the throughput of virtio-vsock with slight changes. While I was testing the v2 of this series I discovered an huge use of memory, so I added patch 1 to mitigate this issue. I put it in this series in order to better track the performance trends. v5: - rebased all patches on net-next - added Stefan's R-b and Michael's A-b v4:

Have you experienced this? What's going on when this occurs? What do I need to do to keep it from occurring? Please advise. Thanks. Dec 4 10:18:17 localhost kernel: e1000: eth1 NIC Link is Down Dec 4 10:18:19 localhost kernel: e1000: eth1 NIC Link is Up 100 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX Dec 4 10:18:21 localhost kernel: e1000: eth1 NIC Link is Down Dec 4 10:18:23 localhost kernel:

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:50:12AM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote: >> >>> Maybe I was wrong, but according to Michael's comment it looks like he >> >>> want >> >>> check affinity_hint_set just for speculative tx polling on rx napi >> >>> instead

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:50:12AM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote: >> >>> Maybe I was wrong, but according to Michael's comment it looks like he >> >>> want >> >>> check affinity_hint_set just for speculative tx polling on rx napi >> >>> instead

Hello friends, I have a Gigabit network with few Windows and Centos 7 machines and I noticed that when copying files via Samba from: Windows to Windows I can copy files with speed of +- 120 MBps (I think this is the max speed gigabit network can provide) But when copying files from: Centos to Centos I get only speeds of about 40 MBps Windows to Centos 40 MBps Centos to Windows 40 MBps I

First, I apologize if this message has been received multiple times. I''m having problems subscribing to this mailing list: Hi xen-users, I am trying to decide whether I should run a game server inside a Xen domain. My primary reason for wanting to virtualize is because I want to isolate this environment from the rest of my server. I really like the idea of isolating the game server

I have set-up xen on my Intel quad core server. Now running different experiment to measure network throughput in virtualized environment. these are some of the results: Netperf-4.5 results for inter-domain communication. Sr.No.              Client               Server               Time(sec)        Throughput(Mbps)    1                   Guest-1              Dom0                   

Hi All Could a VPN be used to help with SIP Tunneling and QoS issues. State 1: Two IP Networks Connected via the Public Internet transmitting VoIP Traffic Say a VoIP User and VoIP Termination Provider. Each side can put QoS onto their part, but if QoS does NOT exist between them then call quality will be bad anyhow. State 2: Same as above except a VPN tunnel is setup between each side. Thus

I can't explain why 700 msecs aren't enough to avoid timeouts in 100 Mbps networks, but my tests verify it, so I'm writing to the list to request that you increase the default timeo to at least 30, or to 600 which is the default for `mount -t nfs`. How to reproduce: 1) Cabling: server <=> 100 Mbps switch <=> client Alternatively, one can use a 1000 Mbps switch and

Dear All, I am having a HP xw4400 with following ethernet controller as reported by lspci Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5755 Gigabit Ethernet PCI Express (rev 02) This machine was running CentOS 5.2 without any problem. After updating the machine with yum update on 8 April, after which it is showing to be CentOS 5.3, this machine stops communicating