[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Linux Router: TCP slow, UDP fast



Hello, Chris,

So, as it seems you have problem with TCP, and not UDP, maybe this is
something with regard to TCP segmentation offloading.

It could be a total shot in the dark, but can you see what
ethtool -k <devname> says?

Then you can have a look at 'man ethtool' and turn on/off the appropriate
stuff.

On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 13:48:53 +0000
Chris <chris at ghostbusters.co.uk> wrote:

> Thanks loads for the quick replies. I'll try and respond individually.
> Lee > I recently disabled tcp_window_scaling and it didn't solve the
> problem. I don't know enough about it. Should I enable it again ? Settings
> differing from defaults are copied in my first post.
> 
> Mike > Strangely I'm not seeing any errors on either the ingress or egress
> NICs:
> 
>           RX packets:3371200609 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>           TX packets:3412500706 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> 
> The only errors I see anywhere are similar on both NICs. Both connect to the
> same model of switch with the same default config:
> 
>      rx_long_byte_count: 1396158525465
>      rx_csum_offload_good: 3341342496
>      rx_csum_offload_errors: 89459
> 
> and it may be worth noting that flow control is on. Are these a reasonable
> level of pause frames to be seeing ? They seem to be higher on non-routing
> boxes.
> 
> Total bytes (TX)2466202288Unicast packets (TX)3436389971Multicast packets
> (TX)213310Broadcast packets (TX)4952902Single Collision Frames (TX)0Late
> Collisions (TX)0Excessive Collisions (TX)0Transmitted Pause Frames (TX)27806
> 
> Florian > They're running without obvious errors. Auto Neg has taken 1Gbps,
> Full. Can Auto Neg cause these symptoms do you think ?
> 
> Thanks again,
> 
> Chris


-- 
Best regards,
Nickola