4 ms·

I would assume you're testing that on the stock kernel settings that aren't really prepared for the highest network throughtput. There's a lot that can be done

I would assume you're testing that on the stock kernel settings that aren't really prepared for the highest network throughtput. There's a lot that can be done in the kernel sysctl's tuning for saturating the NIC and I'd expect you to see a bit better results when doing so. This is a very nice starting point for those interested: https://calomel.org/freebsd_network_tuning.html https://calomel.org/freebsd_network_tuning.html

sigwinch28 6y ago
I am running stock kernel settings. I would naively expect that the default kernel settings for both Linux and FreeBSD would allow me to saturate a 1Gbit link in a LAN. Anyway, this looks like one of those things I could go down the rabbit hole of tuning (so I'm not just copy-pasting swathes of configuration without understanding it), but this was just a quick demo which shows that: "basically, the userspace implementation isn't too slow".
- tachion 6y ago
  At least in case of FreeBSD, the network saturation isn't an active goal of default kernel settings, hence the link I've pasted. It's especially nice, as it explains a lot of things it proposes so that the blind copy&paste wouldn't be so blind. It's really a good read. And I do get a point of your test and I agree with the anecdotal conclusion :)
justin66 6y ago
Judging from the "no vpn" set of numbers, the stock kernel is admirably prepared for the highest network throughput.
pacija 6y ago
Some quite knowledgeable people in the field of BSD networking, including Henning Brauer, maintainer of OpenBSD's PF, have little love for instruction given on site you are linking to: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=130105013025396&w=2 https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=130105013025396&w=2
- toast0 6y ago
  Taking settings for FreeBSD and blindly applying them to OpenBSD isn't a great idea, yeah. Running the defaults is a good place to start, but if you don't get the results you're seeking, the linked articles show a lot of settings that are worth looking at. There are a lot of settings that are reasonable to tune for specific uses, which is why they're configurable. Knowing which ones to poke at first is a good thing.
  - loeg 6y ago
    No... calomel is a bunch of bad recommendations for FreeBSD.

sigwinch28 6y ago

I am running stock kernel settings. I would naively expect that the default kernel settings for both Linux and FreeBSD would allow me to saturate a 1Gbit link in a LAN. Anyway, this looks like one of those things I could go down the rabbit hole of tuning (so I'm not just copy-pasting swathes of configuration without understanding it), but this was just a quick demo which shows that: "basically, the userspace implementation isn't too slow".

tachion 6y ago
At least in case of FreeBSD, the network saturation isn't an active goal of default kernel settings, hence the link I've pasted. It's especially nice, as it explains a lot of things it proposes so that the blind copy&paste wouldn't be so blind. It's really a good read. And I do get a point of your test and I agree with the anecdotal conclusion :)

justin66 6y ago

Judging from the "no vpn" set of numbers, the stock kernel is admirably prepared for the highest network throughput.

pacija 6y ago

Some quite knowledgeable people in the field of BSD networking, including Henning Brauer, maintainer of OpenBSD's PF, have little love for instruction given on site you are linking to: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=130105013025396&w=2 https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=130105013025396&w=2

toast0 6y ago
Taking settings for FreeBSD and blindly applying them to OpenBSD isn't a great idea, yeah. Running the defaults is a good place to start, but if you don't get the results you're seeking, the linked articles show a lot of settings that are worth looking at. There are a lot of settings that are reasonable to tune for specific uses, which is why they're configurable. Knowing which ones to poke at first is a good thing.
- loeg 6y ago
  No... calomel is a bunch of bad recommendations for FreeBSD.