Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
#197 closed (fixed)
ExoSM paths TCP traffic inconsistencies
Reported by: | lnevers@bbn.com | Owned by: | somebody |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | |
Component: | Experiment | Version: | SPIRAL6 |
Keywords: | confirmation tests | Cc: | |
Dependencies: |
Description
Finding TCP traffic results are inconsistent for site to site connection set up by the ExoSM stitching between the GPO and Houston rack.
The following TCP performance was found from GPO EG to Houston EG (repeatable):
1 TCP client = 20.4 Mbits/sec 5 TCP clients = 3.02 Mbits/sec 10 TCP clients = 2.98 Mbits/sec
Why does throughput drop from 20 Mbits/sec as more client are added?
These are the results for the same requests in the opposite direction from Houston EG to GPO EG:
1 TCP client = 7.95 Mbits/sec 5 TCP clients = 8.81 Mbits/sec 10 TCP clients = 8.66 Mbits/sec
Why such low throughput for an ExoSM VLAN?
The results above are inconsistent compared to other sites.
From GPO EG to UFL EG: 1 TCP client = 27.5 Mbits/sec 5 TCP clients = 139 Mbits/sec 10 TCP clients = 278 Mbits/sec From UFL EG to GPO EG: 1 TCP client = 27.5 Mbits/sec 5 TCP clients = 129 Mbits/sec 10 TCP clients = 201 Mbits/sec
Change History (3)
comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by
The bandwidth was not specified, iperf determines how much it can get. The actual iperf commands run:
1 Client: iperf -c 172.16.2.2 -t 60 5 Clients: iperf -c 172.16.2.2 -t 60 -P 5 10 Clients: iperf -c 172.16.2.2 -t 60 -P 10
Each test ran for 60 seconds.
comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
The GPO to Houston tests were re-run and there no longer is any inconsistency in TCP traffic results. Closing ticket.
Please be specific as to what bandwidth was actually set in the request?