[Spread-users] spread performance looks not very good for me

[wei_hu at agilent.com]

Thanks for the reply.  I found two linux machines and did benchmark again, but got worse result.  The linux machines are: model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.40GHz, much faster than my Solaris machine.  I am worrying about my config.  Would you please taking a look at them and giving any comment?

1. 
I have two Linux machines.

redhook         130.29.116.81, Bcast:130.29.119.255  Mask:255.255.252.0
mendecino       130.29.116.83, Bcast:130.29.119.255  Mask:255.255.252.0

2. 
One thing I changed in spread.config is setting following segment:
Spread_Segment  130.29.119.255:4803 {

        redhook         130.29.116.81
        mendecino       130.29.116.83
}

3.
Also changed /etc/spread.access_ip
unix
local
130.29.116.0/22

4. 
run spread on two machines.  There is the output from terminal.
//-----------------------------------------------------------
Num Segments 1
        2       130.29.119.255    4803
                redhook                 130.29.116.81
                mendecino               130.29.116.83
====================
++++++++++++++++++++++
Num of groups: 0 ---no more lines even i run test program, !!!! problem???
//------------------------------------------------------------

5.
run redhook as sender only, and mendecino as receiver only
mendecino>>./spflooder -m 5000 -s 4803 at mendecino -wo
output shows sending rate is about 8Mbps.

redhook>>./spflooder -m 5000 -s 4803 at redhook -ro

6. 
Any comment??

Appreciate!

Wei Hu

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Caudy [mailto:caudy at jhu.edu]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 7:06 PM
To: wei_hu at agilent.com
Cc: spread-users at lists.spread.org
Subject: Re: [Spread-users] spread performance looks not very good for
me


I don't have a decent Solaris cluster to test on, but a quick test using 
our Linux cluster (on a 100 Mbps ethernet network) gives (pretty rough) 
results of:

1 sender + 1 receiver:	85 Mbps
1 sender + 2 receivers:	40 Mbps
3 senders:		52 Mbps

In each of these tests, nodes listed as senders are receiving messages 
as well, and nodes listed as receivers are just receiving.  Having more 
sending nodes will increase the overall throughput, because more of the 
token's circulation time will be used to send.  I'm not sure of the 
details of the test that led to the 8000 * 1KB number on the Spread 
Overview.

I think the problem may lie outside of Spread, or with the Solaris port.

Cheers,
Ryan

wei_hu at agilent.com wrote:

> Spread performance question:
> 
> I am doing some investigation on spread to decide if it could be used as middleware in our project.  I studied spread for two days and did some benchmark.  I do have some questions.  Appreciate any comment on them.
> 
> To do the benchmark, I used one Solaris machine as Sender and other one/two machines as Receivers.  All machines are in one subnet. Spfloor in spread package was used as benchmark program.  There is average message rate I got.  Message size was 1K.
> 1 sender + 1 receiver: 19.07 Mbps
> 1 sender + 2 receiver: 13.46 Mbps
> The sender and one of the receivers is 500Mhz CPU, 1G memory, Solaris OS.  Another receiver is 500Mhz CPU, 512M memory, Solaris OS.
> 
> My question is:
> 1.	The message transmitting rate is far below what is claimed in "Spread Overview" (8K 1Kbytes per second).  Any possible reason for that?
> 2.	Why plugging in more receivers decreased the message transmitting rate?
> 3.	Spread daemon burned up to 70% CPU time?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spread-users mailing list
> Spread-users at lists.spread.org
> http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
> 

-- 
Ryan W. Caudy
Center for Networking and Distributed Systems
Department of Computer Science
Johns Hopkins University