similar to: Freenas domU network performance issue

I have a Dell server with four bonded, gigabit interfaces. Bonding mode is 802.3ad, xmit_hash_policy=layer3+4. When testing this setup with iperf, I never get more than a total of about 3Gbps throughput. Is there anything to tweak to get better throughput? Or am I running into other limits (e.g. was reading about tcp retransmit limits for mode 0). The iperf test was run with iperf -s on the

Hello list, I have two differents installation Xen Hypervisor on two identical physical server, on the same switch : The problem is on my new server (Xen 4.0.1 with pvops kernel 2.6.32.24), I have bad performance on bandwidth I have test with a files copy and "iperf". Result iperf average: Transfert Bandwidth XEN-A -> Windows

On 12/10/2020 16:11, Jason Keltz wrote: > >> Hi Rowland, >> >> I did not leave the domain, but I did delete the entry by either the >> Windows AD tool or "samba-tool computer delete" option.? I can't >> remember which one at this point.? I think that clears up all the >> bits.? Is that correct?? On the local host, I also deleted the >>

Hi, I am seeing a performance degradation while using libvirt to start my vm (kvm). vm is fedora 12 and host is also fedora 12, both with 2.6.32.10-90.fc12.i686. Here are the statistics from iperf : >From VM: [ 3] 0.0-30.0 sec 199 MBytes 55.7 Mbits/sec >From host : [ 3] 0.0-30.0 sec 331 MBytes 92.6 Mbits/sec libvirt command as seen from ps output : /usr/bin/qemu-kvm -S -M

Dear best guys, I really love 5.3 in many ways but here're some unbelievable transfer rates, after I went out and bought a pair of Intel GigaBit Ethernet Cards to solve my performance problem (*laugh*): (In short, see *** below) Tests were done with two Intel GigaBit Ethernet cards (82547EI, 32bit PCI Desktop adapter MT) connected directly without a switch/hub and "device

I''ve just uploaded 0.9.11-pre7. save/restore should be working for 32 bits on both SMP and UP, and maybe for 64 bits although it''s not tested. If someone could test migration it would be much appreciated. The installer seems to not install the drivers under 64 bit environment... but they can then be installed manually. Not sure why at this point.

I''ve just uploaded 0.9.11-pre7. save/restore should be working for 32 bits on both SMP and UP, and maybe for 64 bits although it''s not tested. If someone could test migration it would be much appreciated. The installer seems to not install the drivers under 64 bit environment... but they can then be installed manually. Not sure why at this point.

Hi, In a setup where OpenVSwitch is used with GRE tunels on top of an interface provided by tinc, I'm experiencing significant performance degradation problems (from 100Mb/s down to 1Mb/s in the worst case) and I'm not sure how to fix this. The manifestation of the problem is, from the user point of view, iperf reports ~100Mb/s and rsync reports ~1Mb/s: $ iperf -c 91.224.149.132

Hi, I'm having some weird problem with the setup of the QoS on a bridged network. As the docs states, outbound/inbound average speed should be expressed in KBps (KBytes per second) but in order to get a maximum speed of 10Mbps (megabits per second) surprising enough I have to use 2560 on the guest (not 1280 as expected). Using 1280 units I get a speed og 5Mbps. I'm aware of peak and

Hi, I'm having some weird problem with the setup of the QoS on a bridged network. As the docs states, outbound/inbound average speed should be expressed in KBps (KBytes per second) but in order to get a maximum speed of 10Mbps (megabits per second) surprising enough I have to use 2560 on the guest (not 1280 as expected). Using 1280 units I get a speed og 5Mbps. I'm aware of peak and

Greeting All I am using Filebench benchmark in an "Interactive mode" to test ZFS performance with randomread wordload. My Filebench setting & run results are as follwos ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ filebench> set $filesize=5g filebench> set $dir=/hdd/fs32k filebench> set $iosize=32k filebench> set

I did some testing using samba-3.0.0 as a server and two identical clients one Running W2K and other running Win XP pro. If I write a big file using the W2K client, I'm getting about 25 Mbytes/sec but if I run the same testing using the Win XP Pro, this client only is able to get 12.5 Mbytes/sec. There is a problem between XP and samba?

Samba digest 1966, Jeremy Allison wrote: > For people who are looking for some objective > numbers to help recommend Samba to their employers (I > know there are some of you on this list :-) you might > want to look at the following couple of articles. > > The first one is in Smart Reseller (a USA trade press > magazine) at : > >

Hello everyone, I''m a newbie experimenting with CBQ shaping and am facing a few problems. Can any of you please help? TEST SETUP: +---------------+ +----------------+ | 10.0.0.103 |----------->| 10.0.0.102 | +---------------+ +----------------+ 10.0.0.103: Linux, 100Mbit/s NIC 10.0.0.102: Windows, 100Mbit/s NIC, iperf tcp server (ports 2000 and 2001) WHAT I

dear All, I'm a new student and my job is too shapping bandwith for our campus faculty network. I want to implement htb with Redhat-9.0 distro. does this distro kernel support htb and tc good ? or i should apply some patch or upgrade kernel ? regards reza

Hi, I am testing tinc for a very large scale deployment. I am using tinc-1.1 for testing. test results below are for tinc in switch mode. all other settings are default. test is performed in LAN env. 2 different hosts. I am getting only 24.6 Mbits/sec when tinc is used. without tinc on the same hosts/link I get 95 to 100 Mbits/sec using iperf. Over Tinc: iperf -c 192.168.9.9 -b 100m -l 32k -w

I''ve just uploaded 0.9.11-pre12 of the GPL PV drivers for Windows. Since -pre10 (and -pre11) I''ve fixed a heap of crashes that were plaguing xennet under load, and also rewritten the interrupt/event distribution logic to improve performance. Under windows 2003 I can now get network speeds of 1-2Gbit/second TX and 600Gbit/second RX, which is considerably better than I was

I''ve just uploaded 0.9.11-pre12 of the GPL PV drivers for Windows. Since -pre10 (and -pre11) I''ve fixed a heap of crashes that were plaguing xennet under load, and also rewritten the interrupt/event distribution logic to improve performance. Under windows 2003 I can now get network speeds of 1-2Gbit/second TX and 600Gbit/second RX, which is considerably better than I was

I set up a domU as a backup server, but it has very, very poor network performance with external computers. I ran some tests with iperf and found some very weird results. Using iperf, I get these approximate numbers (the left column is the iperf client and the right column is the iperf server): domU --> domU 1.77 Gbits/sec (using 127.0.0.1) domU --> domU 1.85 Gbits/sec (using domU

I set up a domU as a backup server, but it has very, very poor network performance with external computers. I ran some tests with iperf and found some very weird results. Using iperf, I get these approximate numbers (the left column is the iperf client and the right column is the iperf server): domU --> domU 1.77 Gbits/sec (using 127.0.0.1) domU --> domU 1.85 Gbits/sec (using domU