Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Networking IT

10 Tips For Boosting Network Performance 256

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Paul Venezia and Matt Prigge provide hands-on insights for increasing the efficiency of your organization's network. From losing the leased lines, to building a monster IT test lab on the cheap, to knowing how best to accelerate backups, each tip targets a typical, often overlooked IT bottleneck."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

10 Tips For Boosting Network Performance

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Backup to tape? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Tinctorius ( 1529849 ) * on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @05:28PM (#32424250)
    CERN does.
  • Re:Backup to tape? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Monkeedude1212 ( 1560403 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @05:52PM (#32424558) Journal

    I look at the tapes, and yes, I know how useless they'll be in about 3 years time, we'll have migrated to a new system that isn't compatible with this. I look at the backup tapes from 1999, and how we don't even have a tape drive for them anymore, but should we need to access them we'll probably hunt them down.

    What kind of disks are you talking about? Well I need over 1TB of space per backup, at the end of each month, 4 different 1+ TB backups to be stored indefinately. So I can't use floppies, CD/DVD/BRD...

    Because Hard Drive Disks go through different mediums too you know, I can't plug my SCSI into a SATA. I am not entirely sure that any hard drive I use today will be accessible 10 years from now. And lets look at the prices for a 2TB hard Drive (since that'd be what I'd need). Let's say I get lucky and get them for $100 each. Tapes I can get for $30.

    By using tapes we get the size we need, though the speed is slow, for the right price. Saving almost $3000 a year by using tapes.

  • Re:2Base-TL (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @06:02PM (#32424692)

    In my home town 100Mbit upload speed/100Mbit download speed is worth under $20/month and the reliability is 99.999%. I might as well die laughing... I'm from Eastern Europe...

  • Re:Backup to tape? (Score:5, Informative)

    by tweak13 ( 1171627 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @06:23PM (#32424924)
    An 800GB Native / 1.6TB Compressed LTO-4 tape costs $35. If you don't deliberately choose a ridiculous comparison, tapes really aren't that expensive.
  • by Colin Smith ( 2679 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @06:25PM (#32424942)

    Run remote desktops. Bandwidth consumption to the desktop drops dramatically.
    Run your heavy network I/O over the switch stacking fabric, where you've got shit loads of bandwidth. Channel bond.
    Separate access ports/switches and storage network ports/switches. Use jumbo frames on the storage network, but don't route them.
    Prefer shared memory first, then unix domain sockets over TCP/IP/LAN over WAN. Microsecond (or better) latency vs milliseconds or seconds.
    Dedicate servers to applications, take advantage of copy on write & modern memory management.
    Let your VM management hold a significant proportion of dirty pages. WTF is the point of loads of RAM if you insist on running at disk speed? But do use a logged filesystem.
    Use a load management system. Grid Engine, Condor etc.

  • Re:Backup to tape? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @06:26PM (#32424958)

    A 600GB Super DLT-2 tape cartride costs $119
    A 1TB SATA drive costs $60

    LTO tape has been the market leader ever since it came out. Don't bother with any other tape technology.

    A 800 GB LTO-4 tape costs $40 (plus you get compression on top of that). And LTO-4 is much faster than SATA.

    More importantly, TAPE IS MUCH MORE RELIABLE. LTO-4 error rates are 1 in 10^17. SATA error rates are 1 in 10^14.

    What is your data worth? Since you're going through the hassle of backing it up, it's got to be worth something to you...

  • Re:11. (Score:3, Informative)

    by cstdenis ( 1118589 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @06:38PM (#32425076)

    And thanks to it not requiring activation and having support for running it's own dedicated servers, people still CAN play it.

  • Re:11. (Score:4, Informative)

    by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak@yahoGINSBERGo.com minus poet> on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @07:01PM (#32425356) Homepage Journal

    What's left:

    • Andrew File System
    • Ceph
    • Lustre
    • GlusterFS
    • POHMELFS
    • Parallel Virtual File System
    • CODA

    There's probably a few others I've forgotten.

  • Re:11. (Score:3, Informative)

    by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak@yahoGINSBERGo.com minus poet> on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @07:19PM (#32425542) Homepage Journal

    AFS has been around a LONG time and I'd hate to be within a mile of you if you go around telling IBM that the distributed file system they ship on their mainframes isn't production ready. However, if you want another option, try Polyserve FS. That is most certainly production-ready.

  • Re:monitoring tools (Score:3, Informative)

    by clarkn0va ( 807617 ) <<apt.get> <at> <gmail.com>> on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @07:33PM (#32425684) Homepage

    Handling p2p is not so much about bandwidth as it is about routing capacity and QoS. There's a reason that a proper Linux-equipped home router can withstand torrents with literally thousands of open connections, while your typical DLink or Trendnet will buckle somewhere around 150, and I don't care what your link speed is.

    Similarly, a good healthy torernt can saturdate just about any WAN link you want to throw at, but only a proper QoS solution will keep a 1mbit connection responsive under a comparable load.

  • by JakFrost ( 139885 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @08:04PM (#32425940)

    Interrupt Moderation = Disable

    Here's a real tip, disable Interrupt Moderation on your Network Adapter Cards to achieve greater bandwidth, as much as 100%+, and lower latency (the two measures of network performance) at the expense of processor utilization due to more hardware interrupts that have to be handled.

    Instructions: In Windows open up Control Panel, Network and Sharing Center, click on Change Adapter Settings, open Properties on your Local Area Connection (sometimes #2, #3, or something if you have more network cards), click on the Configure button, then the Advanced tab, select Interrupt Moderation, change the value to Disabled, while there look for any settings with the word Offload and enable them all, and then click the OK button to make the changes. This will restart your network card driver and make the settings effective.

    Most network cards from popular manufacturers such as Intel, Broadcom, Realtek, etc. hold network packets in a buffer until enough time goes by before raising a hardware interrupt and telling the processor, operating system, and network driver that there are packets waiting to be serviced. By disabling Interrupt Moderation you instruct the network driver and card to raise the interrupt every single time a packet comes in, thus making your processor service the network card much faster thus decreasing latency on the packets held in the buffer and also increasing bandwidth by allowing more packets to flow through faster. This increases your processor utilization by a significant amount 10-30% but if you have a recent dual, quad, hex, octo-core processor and recent network drivers that are multi-threaded with multi-core support and have Receive Side Scaling support then the increased processor utilization is negligible to your computer and if you are running a network server then network performance should be a priority anyway.

    I have personally seen and tested corporate and home LAN environments using Fast Ethernet 100 Mbit/s (~11 MByte/s) go from slow 6-7 MByte/s to 10-11 MByte/s throughput, and Gigabit 1,000 Mbit/s (~100 MByte/s) go from ~30 MByte/s to 95-98 MByte/s speeds due to these changes. No other network driver setting had as much performance impact as Interrupt Moderation.

    IEEE 802.1AX (aka 802.3ad, Cisco EtherChannel)

    For advanced network performance improvement look at link aggregation (channel trunking, link bonding, etc.) using the IEEE 802.1AX [wikipedia.org] (aka 802.3ad, Cisco EtherChannel [wikipedia.org]) protocol support in your Intel and Broadcom network adapters using their Advanced Configuration Utilities on your servers to bundle from 2-8 Ethernet network adapters into one trunk to increase your performance. Just tell your network administrators to enable those features on your ports and find out if they are able to do it if your links are going to the same switch or if they have virtual switching enabled in case your links span switches. Just think about 4 x Gigabit performance if you bundle all 4 NICs on most servers.

    NetCPS

    You can test your own network performance with this simple but great utility called NetCPS. Just be sure to disable Interrupt Moderation on both of the computers on your LAN that you will be using for the performance testing otherwise you won't be able to achieve these numbers if one of the computers can't handle the data as fast as the other one. Try it with your laptop and desktop for example.

    NetCPS [netchain.com] - is a handy utility to measure the effective performance on a TCP/IP network.

    Just execute "netcps.exe -s" on the listening system and then do "netcps.exe computername " on the other computer to use the utility to test the throughput bandwidth. For Gigabit you can use the "-m1000" switch to increase the transferred amount to 1,000 MBytes instead of the default 100. Below is an example.

  • Re:Backup to tape? (Score:3, Informative)

    by h4rr4r ( 612664 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @08:33PM (#32426154)

    8Gigs is nothing. We do nightlies into the TBs. If this is not what you do for a living you probably lack the experience to be making valuable input.

    I need 30 blocks of whatever for our rotation system.

  • by linzeal ( 197905 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @10:01PM (#32426798) Journal
    When /dev/null starts giving access to all the files it has gobbled up over the years I imagine would be like the gates of hell opening. Dennis Ritchie as pestilence will ride a black horse made of swarming bits astride with other famous Unix dudes (imagine your own!). Sysadmins who have been practicing the arcane arts of administrating access to Hell's one and only 9600 BAUD BBS running Minix will rise hungry for bandwidth, porn access and hot pockets.
  • Re:Citrix/VDI/etc (Score:3, Informative)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @10:14PM (#32426896)
    Hehe, you have no clue what you are talking about, ICA is completely usable over dialup, there is no half meg image.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @02:16AM (#32428416)

    insmod e1000.ko InterruptThrottleRate=1 (Mode 1)
      insmod e1000.ko InterruptThrottleRate=0 (ITR off)
      insmod e1000.ko InterruptThrottleRate=8000 (Fixed value for all I/O patterns)

    Page 17
    http://download.intel.com/design/network/applnots/ap450.pdf

  • Re:Backup to tape? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Sandbags ( 964742 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @08:47AM (#32430070) Journal

    SATA ports have been on mainboards for nearly 10 years. IDE is a near 20 year old technology and IDE drives are still available. The format methods for disks are current, and data is EASILY migrated from one partition format to another. SATA 6 is backward compatible with SATA I drives and PCI IDE adapters cost about $15. (or USB external adapters)

    Backups should not do 10 years without being migrated, and disk hardware 10m years from now is practically guaranteed to be available to read your disks, and legacy hardware is cheap and easily acquired. Tape hardware migrates to new formats every few years, can only be read in proprietary devices by proprietary software in most cases. Acquiring even a 5 year old legacy tape drive is near impossible, and new tape drives have significant issues reading any more than 1 previous tape generation. Migration to new tapes should happen every 3 years, at a cost of about $80/tape. HDD can go 7-10 years between migrations, at a cost of about the same per drive, but with greater capacity in most cases, easier migration tools, readily available, and drive sets can be RAID sets adding reliability and parity on inexpensive hardware.

We are each entitled to our own opinion, but no one is entitled to his own facts. -- Patrick Moynihan

Working...