Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux 6.8 Network Optimizations Can Boost TCP Performance For Many Concurrent Connections By ~40%

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Linux 6.8 Network Optimizations Can Boost TCP Performance For Many Concurrent Connections By ~40%

    Phoronix: Linux 6.8 Network Optimizations Can Boost TCP Performance For Many Concurrent Connections By ~40%

    Beyond the usual new wired/wireless network hardware support and the other routine churn in the big Linux networking subsystem, the Linux 6.8 kernel is bringing some key improvements to the core networking code that can yield up to a ~40% improvement for TCP performance when encountering many concurrent network connections...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Michael, have you considered doing an head to head benchmark of these changes vs FreeBSD 14 network stack. As the FreeBSD folks like to say their network stack offers the best performance it would be nice to know if the claims hold any water.

    Comment


    • #3
      Bsd нервно курит в сторонке...

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by fahrenheit View Post
        Michael, have you considered doing an head to head benchmark of these changes vs FreeBSD 14 network stack. As the FreeBSD folks like to say their network stack offers the best performance it would be nice to know if the claims hold any water.
        It also depends what they are tuned for default. Throughput or latency?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Volta View Post

          It also depends what they are tuned for default. Throughput or latency?
          and for single applications, some applications or many applications. And likewise for number of simultaneous connections. Lots and lots of variables to consider.

          Comment


          • #6
            So now Linux is almost as fast as Windows, the BSDs and Mac Server?

            It's about time!

            And yes I know that Mac Server is discontinued.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by fahrenheit View Post
              Michael, have you considered doing an head to head benchmark of these changes vs FreeBSD 14 network stack. As the FreeBSD folks like to say their network stack offers the best performance it would be nice to know if the claims hold any water.
              Before these changes, it certainly did. That's one of the reasons why Netflix uses FreeBSD for their CDN.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
                So now Linux is almost as fast as Windows, the BSDs and Mac Server?

                It's about time!

                And yes I know that Mac Server is discontinued.
                BSD I can believe, but Windows? I think you lost your marbles somewhere.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
                  So now Linux is almost as fast as Windows, the BSDs and Mac Server?

                  It's about time!
                  Another ignorant, trolly comment.

                  What the data in the article shows is "cpu seconds / throughput (one tcp_rr round trip)". So, the article's title is incorrect in suggesting it's throughput that's being improved. Rather, it's CPU overhead that's being reduced.

                  How about backing up your claims. Show us comparable data on Windows, the BSDs, and Mac Server.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I've exported the latest performance data between Mac Server, FreeBSD and Linux:

                    Code:
                    Mac Server,FreeBSD,Linux
                    2.3184948692385654,1.9480844463424631,1.3718904551707487
                    2.4640034227596925,2.0703460711945345,1.4579901909820665
                    2.157743477633959,1.8130152297279418,1.2767712885408042
                    1.4601746887013782,1.2268923419857733,0.8640086915392771
                    1.5515455203423232,1.3036654667965082,0.9180742723919072
                    2.392320518394106,2.0101154651595445,1.415574271239116
                    1.3517984214928331,1.1358306263430906,0.7998807227768244
                    1.2029730583252103,1.0107820963442595,0.711818377707225
                    1.9398176257780508,1.6299059340856994,1.1478210803420419
                    2.161199935439482,1.8159194723811032,1.2788165298458474
                    ​
                    Make of it what you will, but I think Mac Server is demonstrably more performance as per above.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X