Abysmal re(4) performance under 8.1-STABLE (mid-August)

Ulrich Spörlein uqs at spoerlein.net
Sun Nov 7 11:24:23 UTC 2010


On Sat, 06.11.2010 at 23:19:33 -0700, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 2:37 AM, Ulrich Spörlein <uqs at spoerlein.net> wrote:
> > Hello Pyun,
> >
> > On this new server, I cannot get more than ~280kByte/s up/downstream out of
> > re(4) without any tweaking.
> >
> > re0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> >        options=389b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,WOL_UCAST,WOL_MCAST,WOL_MAGIC>
> >        ether 00:21:85:63:74:34
> >        inet6 fe80::221:85ff:fe63:7434%re0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
> >        inet 46.4.12.147 netmask 0xffffffc0 broadcast 46.4.12.191
> >        nd6 options=3<PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV>
> >        media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <half-duplex>)
> >        status: active
> >
> 
> It seems the link was resolved to half-duplex. Does link partner
> also agree on the resolved speed/duplex?

As this is a dedicated server in a colo hundreds of km away, I have no
means to check this easily. Especially I cannot change the setting from
auto-neg. Btw, linux will show a negotiated 100/full link via mii-tool.

> > # ifconfig re0
> > re0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> >        options=88<VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM>
> >        ether 00:21:85:63:74:34
> >        inet6 fe80::221:85ff:fe63:7434%re0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
> >        inet 46.4.12.147 netmask 0xffffffc0 broadcast 46.4.12.191
> >        nd6 options=3<PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV>
> >        media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex> (100baseTX <half-duplex>)
> >        status: active
> >
> 
> This time, it seems  you used forced media configuration
> instead of auto. It still shows duplex mismatch so it's
> normal to see poor performance. What makes me wonder
> is why you have duplex mismatch?
> Did you use forced media configuration on link partner?
> What happens when you use different switch?

Sadly, none of these options are available to me :/
But even 100/half should give more than enough performance, right?

Uli


More information about the freebsd-stable mailing list