Re: FreeBSD 4.x and OS-X tcp performance

From: Bill Vermillion (bv_at_wjv.com)
Date: 03/05/05

  • Next message: Andreas Bachmann: "static pid and uid for a socket?" 
    Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 21:48:50 -0500
To: Charles Sprickman <spork@fasttrackmonkey.com>

    "Ang utong ko ay sasabog sa sarap!" exclaimed Charles Sprickman
    while reading this message on Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 18:43
    and then responded with:

    > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:

    > >On Friday 04 March 2005 14:34, Charles Sprickman wrote:
    > >>Howdy,

    > >>Sorry to bring what seems like a simple issue up here.
    > >>I had been blaming slow afp filesharing between my OS-X
    > >>(10.3.8 and previous) and FreeBSD 4.x boxes on netatalk's
    > >>afp implementation for some time. Not too long ago I got
    > >>frustrated with this and tried smb and then ftp. On a simple
    > >>10/100 network, and even with just a crossover between two
    > >>boxes it seems that any tcp transfer tops out at around
    > >>250KB/s.

    > >>On the same network using the same switch I can get near
    > >>Oline-rate to an penBSD box and to another OS-X box.

    > >>If I use nfs and force udp as the transport, I *do* get near
    > >>line-rate between OS-X and FBSD.

    > >>My 5.3 box is tanked at the moment, so I cannot tell if the
    > >>problem happens there as well. I do have a full ADC account,
    > >>so I will be testing with the latest Tiger preview shortly,
    > >>and the ADC access does give me a decent bug reporting
    > >>facility if the fault lies within the OS-X tcp stack.

    > >>I'm no tcpdump wizard, would anyone care to help me track this down?

    > >I'd start with ensureing your nic's media options are properly
    > >set (I've seen this exact behavior during duplex mismatches)

    > Yep, I wouldn't have come here without checking all the basics. I should
    > also add that given three machines in my standard config I get the
    > following results which will also help rule out cabling/speed/duplex
    > issues:

    > os-x <-> obsd - good
    > os-x <-> fbsd - bad
    > obsd <-> fbsd - good
    > os-x <-> os-x - good

    I've seen this before. A client had three OS/X machines in our
    rack, one standard G4 and two Xrack devices.

    One had severe problems connecting withour FreeBSD machines but not
    to others.

    I was never able to get with him in an interactive mode to check
    things.

    He said he'd tried different settings but never got with me when he
    was doing this so that I could check his machine, our machine, and
    the intermediate switch.

    He moved out to a rack of his own so I never did find out what was
    wrong.

    I do suspect duplex problems. He was connecting to one of our
    Cicso switches and Cisco has some extensive docs on some
    configuration problems. Part of it comes from when some vendors
    decided to add their own features and violated standards.

    http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/473/46.html

    This is the link I saved from awhile back. I hope it is
    still valid.

    But problems like this usually come from one side or the other not
    properly responding to auto-negotiation as documented. When
    auto-neg fails at least one side will go to half-duplex, and with
    the other in fdx then you usually only see throughput of
    about 10% of normal because of data being sent back on a line that
    the fdx line thinks is clear to send upon.

    Bill 

    -- 
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Andreas Bachmann: "static pid and uid for a socket?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: DAT playback issue- refresher course needed
      ... and the interfaces are nonstandard and do not actually ... They will usually work with most AES/EBU devices ... off of hours and hours of tapes (recorded on many different machines), ... standard digital I/O and a reliable transport. ...
      (rec.audio.pro)
    • Re: is freebsd = linux = unix?
      ... >BV> Actually the original Radio Shack computers ran their own OS ... And we were all on our own with those machines. ... Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv. ...
      (comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc)
    • Re: Accessing Apps through RWW
      ... It is Standard with 2 nics. ... When I setup the machines using the connect ... computer wizard I got a message stating that I am not authorized to view this ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
    • Re: LSE64 in standard Forth
      ... complement machines for ages, so it's simply the same thing as with C: ... two's complement unless you are on a really exotic piece of hardware. ... But in Standard Forth it's not well defined, not because of the two's complement issue, but because of the size. ... Three of the four C implementations listed in K&R edition 1 are 8/16/32 bit machines. ...
      (comp.lang.forth)
    • Re: #define BITS_PER(x) (8 * sizeof(x))
      ... People are allowed to present hypothetical machines to make a point. ... (Committee oversight is not an adequate answer; ... needs to evolve, let it evolve.) ... Put in a request for it to be added to the standard. ...
      (comp.lang.c)