Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[jmk]

The new fileserver stuff is (currently) built on top of the 'normal' Plan 9
kernel so you get the SMP stuff for free.

Yes, you can saturate a PCI GbE from an Intel x86 system, just 'dd' into the ether data file.
But with TCP/IP, not at the moment. Our best minds are working on it, though.

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[Doc Shipley]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2002 jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:

> The new fileserver stuff is (currently) built on top of the 'normal' Plan 9
> kernel so you get the SMP stuff for free.
>
> Yes, you can saturate a PCI GbE from an Intel x86 system, just 'dd' into the ether data file.

  Are you sure you're saturating the ethernet adapter and not the PCI
bus?  A full 64-bit, 33MHz PCI bus gives something on the order of 275
MB, or 2200 Mb.  That's _total_ available bandwidth.  Even in a totally
unloaded setup, I can't see getting a gigabit through it without
knocking the box on its nose.
  Never mind the bus overhead when you start moving bits from disk
instead of the, um, ether.

  Mind, I'm not claiming you're wrong, I just really want to know what
hardware will do that.  I may hear my next system calling.

> But with TCP/IP, not at the moment. Our best minds are working on it, though.

  That's a true fact.

	Doc

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[cnielsen]

On Fri, Jul 19, 2002 at 11:54:49AM -0500, Doc Shipley wrote:
> 
>   Are you sure you're saturating the ethernet adapter and not the PCI
> bus?  A full 64-bit, 33MHz PCI bus gives something on the order of 275
> MB, or 2200 Mb.  That's _total_ available bandwidth.  Even in a totally
> unloaded setup, I can't see getting a gigabit through it without
> knocking the box on its nose.
>   Never mind the bus overhead when you start moving bits from disk
> instead of the, um, ether.

64-bit, 66MHz PCI should be able to handle it, in theory. 
you get 4224Mbps for the PCI bus, so it's less likely you're
going to saturate the bus.

at that point it becomes a game of chase the bottleneck.

from my limited testing with hardware similar to what jmk
currently has, i see about what he does. part of that may
be due to the 620Ts having only 1M SRAM onboard. iirc, the
SysKonnect cards have 2M SRAM and perform better as a result.
i have an SK-9821 kicking around. i just need to sit down
and write a p9 driver for it. :-)

-- 
Christopher Nielsen - Metal-wielding pyro techie
"Those who are willing to trade freedom for security deserve
 neither freedom nor security." --Benjamin Franklin

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[jmk]

>> [...] but that's the best a beleaguered
>> telecomms company can do...).
>
> Hey I thought we were embittered!
>
> Or was that embattled?  :-)

the most recent adjective used in the press is 'struggling'.
i'm sure there will be more next week when earning are announced.

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[David Gordon Hogan]

> [...] but that's the best a beleaguered
> telecomms company can do...).

Hey I thought we were embittered!

Or was that embattled?  :-)

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[jmk]

On Fri Jul 19 12:55:36 EDT 2002, doc@mdrconsult.com wrote:
> ...
>   Are you sure you're saturating the ethernet adapter and not the PCI
> bus?  A full 64-bit, 33MHz PCI bus gives something on the order of 275
> MB, or 2200 Mb.  That's _total_ available bandwidth.  Even in a totally
> unloaded setup, I can't see getting a gigabit through it without
> knocking the box on its nose.
>   Never mind the bus overhead when you start moving bits from disk
> instead of the, um, ether.
> ...

Maybe I'm misremembering, but was sure I did it. Of course, I no longer
have that hardware available. The only hardware I do have will only manage
850Mb/s (933MHz PIII, 64-bit/66MHz PCI, Netgear GA620T CAT-5 GbE card,
PC133 SDRAM - none of it recent hardware, but that's the best a beleaguered
telecomms company can do...).

--jim

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[Doc Shipley]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2002 bwc@coraid.com wrote:

> Has anyone saturated a Gigabit Ethernet with PCI?

  Not on Intel/x86 platforms.  I've heard, but can't substantiate, that
the 64bit PCI on some of the IBM Power4s will.  But if I'm not mistaken,
the gigE is built into that bus.

	Doc

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[bwc]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 51 bytes --]

Has anyone saturated a Gigabit Ethernet with PCI?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2288 bytes --]

From: Jack Johnson <fragment@nas.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 08:54:30 -0700
Message-ID: <3D383636.3020802@nas.com>

jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> The current filesystem code makes makes no use of extra CPUs on Intel
> platforms. However, the new filesystem stuff we are working on will.

Could you go into a little more detail about that?

In my limited experience, file service tends not to be bound by CPU 
(unless you're running Microsoft software), but by disk I/O and network 
throughput.

Unless you're trying to saturate Gigabit Ethernet, I suppose.  But even 
then, by my estimation a 1.6GHz P4 should be able to handle that 
(assuming the various busses can keep up, and I'd shudder to think what 
you spent on disk to sustain that).

Multiprocessor support could be very nice for older hardware, though.

-Jack

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[Jack Johnson]

jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> The current filesystem code makes makes no use of extra CPUs on Intel
> platforms. However, the new filesystem stuff we are working on will.

Could you go into a little more detail about that?

In my limited experience, file service tends not to be bound by CPU 
(unless you're running Microsoft software), but by disk I/O and network 
throughput.

Unless you're trying to saturate Gigabit Ethernet, I suppose.  But even 
then, by my estimation a 1.6GHz P4 should be able to handle that 
(assuming the various busses can keep up, and I'd shudder to think what 
you spent on disk to sustain that).

Multiprocessor support could be very nice for older hardware, though.

-Jack

Re: [9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[jmk]

On Fri Jul 19 04:08:39 EDT 2002, okamoto@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp wrote:
> I saw some very charming PCs today, those are named as KCF-S868
> or KCF-S767 barebone system, the former of which is for Pen 4 and
> the latter for AMD (~1.1GHz).   The chipset is VIA/P4M266 and SIS 740,
> respectively.   The most atrractive point to me is their box size, very
> small and massive, 215(W)x310(D)x200(H).  They can have a HDD,
> aCD/DVD-ROM and a floppy with integrated nic chip.   They have also 
> one PCI and AGP(P4 version) slots.
> 
> I'd like to use one of them for our file server with Tekram scsi card
> and external scsi drives.   Does Pen 4 can run file server?
> 
> Another one, is there any advantage to use dual Pentium system for
> file server?
> 
> Kenji

Yes, Plan 9 will work with the P4 (if you have a chip faster than 2.2GHz
make sure you have the current updates installed or the chip speed will be
incorrectly determined and weird things happen).

I believe there are hardware issues with the P4 and TLB flushing in SMP
mode we'd have to put fixes in for, but we don't have such a system to try
it out on.

The current filesystem code makes makes no use of extra CPUs on Intel
platforms. However, the new filesystem stuff we are working on will.

--jim

[9fans] small boxed PC and dual CPU file server?

[okamoto]

I saw some very charming PCs today, those are named as KCF-S868
or KCF-S767 barebone system, the former of which is for Pen 4 and
the latter for AMD (~1.1GHz).   The chipset is VIA/P4M266 and SIS 740,
respectively.   The most atrractive point to me is their box size, very
small and massive, 215(W)x310(D)x200(H).  They can have a HDD,
aCD/DVD-ROM and a floppy with integrated nic chip.   They have also 
one PCI and AGP(P4 version) slots.

I'd like to use one of them for our file server with Tekram scsi card
and external scsi drives.   Does Pen 4 can run file server?

Another one, is there any advantage to use dual Pentium system for
file server?

Kenji