[rhn-users] Re: rhn-users Digest, Vol 30, Issue 28
vishal gaurav
vishalgaurav01 at gmail.com
Tue Aug 22 15:48:13 UTC 2006
Hallo,
I wish add your software to my download based website.Please send me your
product download link,screenshuts,and description for my download based
website.
Thanking you...
On 8/22/06, rhn-users-request at redhat.com <rhn-users-request at redhat.com>
wrote:
>
> Send rhn-users mailing list submissions to
> rhn-users at redhat.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhn-users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> rhn-users-request at redhat.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> rhn-users-owner at redhat.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of rhn-users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: The purpose of this mailing list (jef e)
> 2. Re: Gigabit transfer speeds (Dan Hunter)
> 3. Re: Gigabit transfer speeds (Tim Schoenfelder)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:05:44 -0400
> From: jef e <jef_umd at umd.umich.edu>
> Subject: Re: [rhn-users] The purpose of this mailing list
> To: Red Hat Network Users List <rhn-users at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <44EA1218.5070209 at umd.umich.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Máirín Duffy wrote:
>
> > How does this sound?:
> >
> > "Discussions about using Red Hat Network to apply updates to Red Hat
> > Enterprise Linux, including discussion about particular Red Hat
> > Enterprise Linux updates."
> >
> > Is this too broad? How do / have you found this list most useful? Let's
> > focus the purpose towards that.
>
> I think it's a good start, but despite all good intentions to make the
> description as accurate as possible, I think that you might need to
> actually include what the list *isn't* for.
>
> Perhaps also include pointers to the other lists, so that those folks
> that do need help can get better results from the proper community of
> users.
>
>
> jef
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:16:36 -0500
> From: "Dan Hunter" <dmhunter at charter.net>
> Subject: Re: [rhn-users] Gigabit transfer speeds
> To: "Red Hat Network Users List" <rhn-users at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <002001c6c588$9d0d5a80$64011811 at mutant>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I have already set the packet size as large as the windows driver allow -
> MTU = 7 Kb
>
> But coping from a very high speed disk, or RAM drive is certainly a good
> question.
> Is the limitation the ethernet, PCI bus, hard driver controller, or the
> hard drive itself????
>
> Hmmm, me thinks an experiment or two is in the wind!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tim Schoenfelder
> To: Red Hat Network Users List
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 1:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [rhn-users] Gigabit transfer speeds
>
>
> Increase your packet size...
>
> One of our networking class projects a couple years ago was to benchmark
> gigibit ethernet transfer speeds.
>
> I benchmarked 700mb/s+ between two Linux PCs which was reasonable to our
> instructor.
>
> He emphasized that the brand/chipset of cards made a big difference ( it
> wasn't the most expensive that performed best ... ) as well as the drivers.
>
> Some of his published tests as described below show that you can achieve
> at least 700mb/s even with 32bit Netgear GA622T cards as illustrated in a ps
> link from his website:
>
> http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/
>
> Benchmark project links:
> http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/gig-over-copper/
> http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/gig-over-copper/gig-over-copper.html
>
> PS file showing performance benchmarks ( note 700mb/s+ requires packet
> size of 100k+ bytes ):
>
> http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/gig-over-copper/hsln-lcn.ps
>
> Tim
>
>
> On 8/21/06, Corne Beerse <cbeerse at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dan Hunter wrote:
>
> > I regularly move large files from a windows XP machine to a Fedora
> > Core 5 machine.
> > To avoid bothering other network users, I purchased two Linksys
> EG1032
> > gigabit ether net cards.
> > The cards have been installed. a direct PC to PC gigabit cross over
> > cable connects them.
> > A separate set of IP address have been set up.
> > I can verify that data is being transfered over the gigabit cable
> with
> > windows task manager.
> >
> > Transfers over the 10/100 link show up at 82 or 83 percent - about 80
> > Mbps.
> > Transfers over the gigabit link show up at 20 to 26 percent - about
> > 230 Mbps.
> >
> > What do I have set up wrong?
> >
> >
> Your expectations are to high. If you have about 20% utilisation with a
> Gbit nic, I'd say you are doing verry nice.
>
> With the move to gigabit networking, the nic is no longer the
> bottleneck. If you move data from disk on one machine or to disk on an
> other, the disk-controllers, disk interfaces or even the actual disks
> are most likely the bottlenecks. Then, the disk does not need to be the
> bottleneck. Think about the speed of internal busses and for which they
> are used while you are dumping data...
>
>
> CBee
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhn-users mailing list
> rhn-users at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhn-users
>
>
>
>
> --
> Tim Schoenfelder
> http://timschoenfelder.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhn-users mailing list
> rhn-users at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhn-users
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhn-users/attachments/20060821/b0af1141/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 10:10:02 -0500
> From: "Tim Schoenfelder" <tim at timschoenfelder.com>
> Subject: Re: [rhn-users] Gigabit transfer speeds
> To: "Red Hat Network Users List" <rhn-users at redhat.com>
> Message-ID:
> <52d4eaab0608220810p2a44de59o8af10edfcf8cd068 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> The testing also involved linux/windows communications...
>
> >From the webpage:
> "Note: All cards were tested at 1500, 3000, 4000, and 6000 values for the
> TCP MTU size. The drivers for the cards were not modified. Cards based
> upon
> the dp83820 chipset were limited to 6000MTU due to driver defaults. All
> other cards were tested through 9000MTU."
>
> NOTE:
> http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/gig-over-copper/gig-over-copper.htmldescribes
> that the benchmarks were gathered using Netpipe
> 2.4:
> http://www.scl.ameslab.gov/netpipe
>
> >From the above netpipe webpage ... "Gigabit Ethernet delivers around 900
> Mbps with latencies of 25-62 microseconds from 64-bit 66 MHz PCI buses."
>
>
> .. I haven't substantiated this but you may wish to consider the 100K+
> packet size as the TcpWindowSize as described in
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314053/en-us
>
> " Description: This parameter determines the maximum TCP receive window
> size
> of the computer. The receive window specifies the number of bytes a sender
> can transmit without receiving an acknowledgment. Generally, larger
> receive
> windows improve performance over high (delay * bandwidth) networks. For
> highest efficiency, the receive window must be an even multiple of the TCP
> Maximum Segment Size (MSS)."
>
>
> The complete benchmark write-up is located at:
>
> http://www.cns.uni.edu/~gray/gig-over-copper/hsln-lcn.ps<
> http://www.cns.uni.edu/%7Egray/gig-over-copper/hsln-lcn.ps>
>
>
> These were the OS environments:( Note: Even the win2k tests were over
> 600mbs....)
>
> "Each system was configured to boot
> into Debian 3.0 GNU/Linux and Microsoft Windows 2000
> Professional. Versions 2.4.7, 2.4.19-pre9-ac2, and 2.5.7 of
> the Linux kernel were used for testing on the GNU/Linux
> operating system. Service pack 2 was applied to the Win-
> dows 2000 installation."
>
>
> Tim
>
> On 8/21/06, Dan Hunter <dmhunter at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> > I have already set the packet size as large as the windows driver allow
> -
> > MTU = 7 Kb
> >
> > But coping from a very high speed disk, or RAM drive is certainly a good
> > question.
> > Is the limitation the ethernet, PCI bus, hard driver controller, or the
> > hard drive itself????
> >
> > Hmmm, me thinks an experiment or two is in the wind!
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > *From:* Tim Schoenfelder <tim at timschoenfelder.com>
> > *To:* Red Hat Network Users List <rhn-users at redhat.com>
> > *Sent:* Monday, August 21, 2006 1:37 PM
> > *Subject:* Re: [rhn-users] Gigabit transfer speeds
> >
> > Increase your packet size...
> >
> > One of our networking class projects a couple years ago was to benchmark
> > gigibit ethernet transfer speeds.
> >
> > I benchmarked 700mb/s+ between two Linux PCs which was reasonable to our
> > instructor.
> >
> > He emphasized that the brand/chipset of cards made a big difference ( it
> > wasn't the most expensive that performed best ... ) as well as the
> drivers.
> >
> > Some of his published tests as described below show that you can achieve
> > at least 700mb/s even with 32bit Netgear GA622T cards as illustrated in
> a ps
> > link from his website:
> >
> > http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/ <http://www.cs.uni.edu/%7Egray/>
> >
> > Benchmark project links:
> > http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/gig-over-copper/<
> http://www.cs.uni.edu/%7Egray/gig-over-copper/>
> > http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/gig-over-copper/gig-over-copper.html<
> http://www.cs.uni.edu/%7Egray/gig-over-copper/gig-over-copper.html>
> >
> > PS file showing performance benchmarks ( note 700mb/s+ requires packet
> > size of 100k+ bytes ):
> >
> > http://www.cs.uni.edu/~gray/gig-over-copper/hsln-lcn.ps<
> http://www.cs.uni.edu/%7Egray/gig-over-copper/hsln-lcn.ps>
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > On 8/21/06, Corne Beerse <cbeerse at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dan Hunter wrote:
> > >
> > > > I regularly move large files from a windows XP machine to a Fedora
> > > > Core 5 machine.
> > > > To avoid bothering other network users, I purchased two Linksys
> EG1032
> > > > gigabit ether net cards.
> > > > The cards have been installed. a direct PC to PC gigabit cross over
> > > > cable connects them.
> > > > A separate set of IP address have been set up.
> > > > I can verify that data is being transfered over the gigabit cable
> with
> > >
> > > > windows task manager.
> > > >
> > > > Transfers over the 10/100 link show up at 82 or 83 percent - about
> 80
> > > > Mbps.
> > > > Transfers over the gigabit link show up at 20 to 26 percent - about
> > > > 230 Mbps.
> > > >
> > > > What do I have set up wrong?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Your expectations are to high. If you have about 20% utilisation with
> a
> > > Gbit nic, I'd say you are doing verry nice.
> > >
> > > With the move to gigabit networking, the nic is no longer the
> > > bottleneck. If you move data from disk on one machine or to disk on an
> > > other, the disk-controllers, disk interfaces or even the actual disks
> > > are most likely the bottlenecks. Then, the disk does not need to be
> the
> > > bottleneck. Think about the speed of internal busses and for which
> they
> > > are used while you are dumping data...
> > >
> > >
> > > CBee
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > rhn-users mailing list
> > > rhn-users at redhat.com
> > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhn-users
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tim Schoenfelder
> > http://timschoenfelder.com
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rhn-users mailing list
> > rhn-users at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhn-users
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rhn-users mailing list
> > rhn-users at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhn-users
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Tim Schoenfelder
> http://timschoenfelder.com
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhn-users/attachments/20060822/4ff3bc26/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhn-users mailing list
> rhn-users at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhn-users
>
> End of rhn-users Digest, Vol 30, Issue 28
> *****************************************
>
--
Vishal Gaurav
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/rhn-users/attachments/20060822/d9f1b0c4/attachment.htm>
More information about the rhn-users
mailing list