Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- From: Bod43@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 16:56:22 -0700 (PDT)
On 5 Oct, 22:47, Rick Jones <rick.jon...@xxxxxx> wrote:
Bo...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
As Rick Jones has already discussed there are a number of individual
limitations of such a circuit. The limitation of any particular
application on any particular circuit cannot be guessed at in
advance careful analysis is required.
The BIG surprise (well it was to me) is the effect that the end to
end propagation delay has on the performance. For many situations it
is the *dominating* factor.
I now use iperf in preference to ttcp since it is more flexible.
Gaak, iperf :) Seriously, offline feel free to let me know what might
need to happen in netperf to make it more palatable to you.
In summary - the key is that netperf seems to me to be
unix centric and I am not.
In rambling :-)
Well it's not that netperf is unpalatable as such.
I have not really used it significantly due to the lack of
availability of MS Windows binaries that look to be from
a trustworthy source.
I am pretty sure that I had a look at it quite a few years
ago, maybe on solaris.
I have always worked in MS Windows environments
and I first started to use ttcp that Microsoft shipped
as part of their IPV6 protocol stack. I was confident
that this would be free of malicious code. I dont think
that it is available now on the MS web site.
I then needed to test using multicast and I found that
I could do this with iperf. I found some executable
code that I was reasonably happy with.
If there is a reasonably safe looking windows binary for
netperf then I will for sure have another look at it.
I really, really don't want to get into installing cygwin
and compiling it. Maybe I can do it and maybe I can't
get it to go.
I am far from sure but I suspect that I have considered netpref
a few times but difficulties in locating a trustworthy looking
executable for Windows has swayed me away from it in
each case.
If you could point me to a Windows binary then I will
for sure have a look. I would MUCH prefer a native
build that did not need cygwin.
Regarding the multiple stream thing. It was not a key
driver in selecting iperf. I did not even realise that it did it
until recently. It is though very handy as I think that
multiple streams are a very reliable way of working
towards determining the true 'network' performance.
i.e. it removes the influence of a number
of potential bandwidth delay product limitations
of the system.
In the absence of a native multiple stream in windows
you can do something like
for /L %i in (1, 1, 9) do start cmd /c iperf -p200%i ...
at a guess from my dodgy memory
or "cmd /k" of you need the results to remain on
the screen
As usual a bit of a ramble - hope it makes some sense.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- From: Robert Redelmeier
- Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- From: Rick Jones
- Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- References:
- Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- From: newbie123
- Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- From: Bod43
- Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- From: Rick Jones
- Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- Prev by Date: Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- Next by Date: Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- Previous by thread: Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- Next by thread: Re: Ethernet Performance Testing and throughput
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
