From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A40F05A43 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 20:36:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2015 11:36:07 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,517,1432623600"; d="scan'208";a="610239800" Received: from irsmsx103.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.157]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2015 11:36:06 -0700 Received: from irsmsx156.ger.corp.intel.com (10.108.20.68) by IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.157) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 19:36:04 +0100 Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.201]) by IRSMSX156.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.125]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 19:36:04 +0100 From: "Gray, Mark D" To: Jun Xiao Thread-Topic: [ovs-discuss] vswitches performance comparison Thread-Index: AQHQw99ATEbPofzxDUevAi0fkt6lRp3mOhog///zYICAABHVsA== Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 18:36:03 +0000 Message-ID: <738D45BC1F695740A983F43CFE1B7EA92E2BEFD4@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <----Tc------lRRzc$3e501353-5ebe-4161-b9d4-01ebdf81a6de@cloudnetengine.com> <738D45BC1F695740A983F43CFE1B7EA92E2BEF4B@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: dev , discuss Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [ovs-discuss] vswitches performance comparison X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 18:36:08 -0000 >=20 > I'd like to hope that's my methodology problem, but I just follow the > installation guide without any customization. >=20 > Hi Mark, do you have any performance data share with us? Maybe we are > using different type of workloads, like I mentioned I am using typical da= ta > center workload, I guess you are talking about NFV type of workload? The number getting floated around on the mailing list recently is 16.5Mpps for phy-phy. However, I don't think we have any iperf data off-hand for you= r usecase. When we test throughput into the vm we usually generate the traffi= c externally and send NIC->OVS->VM->OVS->NIC. This is a little different to your setup. I do know, however, that ovs-dpdk typically has a much larger throughput th= an the kernel space datapath. =20 Have you seen this? https://wiki.opnfv.org/characterize_vswitch_performance= _for_telco_nfv_use_cases >=20 > Thanks, > Jun