On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Christopher E. Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Richard> It might not be a 2.0.36 driver that is needed. It may be the
> > > Richard> 2.0.36 reliability!
> > >
> > > 2.0.36 reliawhat?? If you are looking for GigE performance you are
> > > likely to want SMP and SMP in 2.0.36 is absolutely not realiable.
> >
> > Actually by 2.0.36 its very reliable. It still gives sucky performance.
>
> forbin:~# uname -a;uptime
> Linux forbin 2.0.36 #2 SMP Sun Apr 4 14:04:56 AKDT 1999 i686 unknown
> 7:40pm up 435 days, 2:43, 1 user, load average: 5.46, 5.30, 5.28
> Dual PPro 200Mhz, 128M ECC FPM @66mhz
> Ultra-Wide + Cheetas
> Box has been rebooted once since the last kernel build, when
> we lost power for 4 hrs. We had 3.5 hrs backup power.
That beats our cluster record. The longest uptime we had with 2.0.* was
between the power conditioner shorting out when a fan was being replaced,
and a whole-room shutdown that was traced to a air conditioner on fire --
only nine months. The 2.0.3* series was very, very reliable.
> Right about the network io though, it will easily max a single
> 100Mbit interface, but won't go past 180Mbit total (box has 2 100Mbit
> FD interfaces).
Hmmm, we had very similar boxes, Dual P6-200 PR440FX motherboards, and got
better performance. It was about 270Mbps w/ TCP/IP on three bonded Fast
Ethernet channels. This beat a single Yellowfin card, but IIRC the Hamachi
got over 300Mbps (user-level 'ttcp' with larger transfer sizes).
Alas, I no longer have that hardware to test with. And it was a local peak
in performance.
Donald Becker becker@scyld.com
Scyld Computing Corporation http://www.scyld.com
410 Severn Ave. Suite 210 Beowulf Clusters / Linux Installations
Annapolis MD 21403
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 15 2000 - 21:00:14 EST