From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5982621F1E8; Tue, 14 May 2013 12:48:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r4EJmjJv023376 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 14 May 2013 15:48:45 -0400 Received: from localhost (ovpn-116-64.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.64]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r4EJmhAi000428; Tue, 14 May 2013 15:48:44 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 21:48:41 +0200 From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer To: Dave Taht Message-ID: <20130514214841.1441c4b7@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20130514154838.2d9622b7@redhat.com> Organization: Red Hat Inc. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 10.5.11.12 Cc: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, bloat Subject: Re: [Codel] [Bloat] Network test tools for many parallel/concurrent connections? X-BeenThere: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: CoDel AQM discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 19:48:47 -0000 On Tue, 14 May 2013 07:46:02 -0700 Dave Taht wrote: > I still use tcptrace and xplot.org for deep dives. Okay, I just hoped something new popped up. Didn't we add some tcp trace system to the kernel? > I just fired off 2048 netperfs to localhost on my laptop. It started > bogging down at 1000 but made it to the end, all connections chugging > away. So you just did a for loop with netperf's I assume. If so, remember to adjust the "ulimit" of the shell. Run 'ulimit -a' and you most likely need to adjust "ulimit -u". I also played with "iperf --parallel" but iperf is not consistently starting all the TCP connections. > Probably a better tool would be the apache benchmark `ab` or > something else that is built to stress out web sites. Yes, I guess that might be the easiest "quick" solution. -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer