Recommended Posts

I always use thick provisioning for running production servers and thin provisioning for testing things out in non-production servers. In fact, I'm going to go and see what I can do with the e1000 adapter, afaik it showed up in the list for my windows VM but not for my arch linux VM, not sure if it's because I'm using open-vm-tools or something else or what :s

Just wondering but have you tried a Linux VM and tested its SAMBA performance? I've been trying to track down an issue with three separate physical Windows 2008 R2 servers where their upload to other machines is dismal but other operating systems give great speeds. I have the three servers in an OVH data centre in France and I just thought I'd bring this up because when I tested Linux everything was A-OK. I'm sure if there was a problem with W2008R2 that it would be well publicised by now but I am starting to wonder...

Might be worth installing another OS just to check and see what happens.

iperf doesn't seam to like my Smart Switch, I get this output:


C:\Users\cpressland\Downloads>iperf -c 10.0.1.5
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.1.5, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 8.00 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[128] local 10.0.1.11 port 52443 connected with 10.0.1.5 port 5001
write failed: Software caused connection abort
read on server close failed: Software caused connection abort
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[128] 0.0- 0.0 sec 24.0 KBytes 16.4 Mbits/sec
C:\Users\cpressland\Downloads>

[/CODE]

Might be worth installing another OS just to check and see what happens.

Going to be setting up an Ubuntu 12.04 box to test later.

Here is a push from the VM itself to my workstation. This is from 2k8r2 storage essentials vm, seems to be pushing a file just fine.

post-14624-0-60312700-1335442654.jpg

Even after Zero-Filling the Drive, I'm not getting that kind of performance.

Maybe worth running a filesystem zeroing utility on each VM then just to expand them out to full size.

That doesn't explain my issues though.

Recommend any Free-Space ZeroFilling Tools?

Sure, use the vSphere Client. Browse the Datastore, locate the vmdk file, Right click and choose Inflate.

Okay - the connection issue was being caused by a service on 'Galactica' using port 5001.

I setup the same on my Mac Mini and ran the same test and got the following:


C:\Users\cpressland\Downloads>iperf -c 10.0.1.61 -w 256k
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.1.61, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 256 KByte
------------------------------------------------------------
[128] local 10.0.1.11 port 54281 connected with 10.0.1.61 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[128] 0.0-10.0 sec 423 MBytes 355 Mbits/sec

[/CODE]

well 355/8 gives you at max 44MBps

Half of what I am seeing. So that sure ain't helping you out. Why such bad network performance?

You mentioned a smart switch?? Maybe its not so smart ;) hehehe

Are you still 9000 mtu on your virtual switch? Do you have promiscuous allowed or something? Traffic shaping enabled?

You don't have your VMs in your management port group do you?

post-14624-0-76511100-1335447294.jpg

can you change it out to see if that changes your performance? I am running on gs108Tv1.. Do you have something tweaked in it that could be causing issues? I have jumbo support off, are you runing IGMP snooping? etc..? I use to run IGMP snooping and wish I could turn it back on.. But my freaking ecurrent bridge has a freaking multicast mac on it, and when I turn it on it gets blocked ;) Have not bothered into looking how to allow it to be on but block still block the other multicast traffic -- might look into that tonight ;)

192.168.1.220 7f-bf-a9-aa-29-5b dynamic

Why they did that I have no freaking Idea - and there is no way to fix it local, have to send it too them.. Which means will have it offline for weeks and weeks - has to go back to the UK.. I might just buy the new one that is coming out, and then send this one to them to fix.

But for test sure can not hurt to try a different switch.

From my FileServer:


C:\Users\CPressland\Downloads>iperf -c 10.0.1.61 -w 256k
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.1.61, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 256 KByte
------------------------------------------------------------
[164] local 10.0.1.5 port 62577 connected with 10.0.1.61 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[164] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.08 GBytes 930 Mbits/sec
[/CODE]

I think it's safe to say it's only happening to ESXi.

If you don't have a switch with you, try a crossover cable?

Don't have one.

hmm I think newer nics you don't have to have it like that huh??? don't some of them take care of that for you??

Some of what?

From my FileServer:


C:\Users\CPressland\Downloads>iperf -c 10.0.1.61 -w 256k
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.1.61, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 256 KByte
------------------------------------------------------------
[164] local 10.0.1.5 port 62577 connected with 10.0.1.61 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[164] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.08 GBytes 930 Mbits/sec
[/CODE]

I think it's safe to say it's only happening to ESXi.

Don't have one.

Some of what?

the nics... some nics that are new don't need crossover cables...

Yeah the newer cisco switches allow you to use either crossover or straight through cables in them and some of the newer expensive NICs allow it, as you've got intel server NICs, try it with a straight through cable and see if it acts as a crossover.

Wow that's pretty amazing :o swapped out all e1000's for vmxnet3 (took a lot of effort and editing of files with vi, urgh) and set all MTUs to 9000...

Made a urandom file on linux VM and sent it to host via scp;

bigfile 100% 78MB 39.1MB/s 00:02

Holy crap, what an improvement! I'm impressed, nice advice :D

yeah i would say that with 930Mbps -- its not a switch issue ;)

Unless its an issue to that nic in the esxi.

But yeah switch was long shot at best.. But if your seeing that kind of throughput between other devices.. Then I would say its good, you could move ports maybe? Change cables to the esxi..

So WTF would cause such bad performance? Did you make any tweaks to that virtual nic on the VM?

As you saw I am getting great performance from my vms -- and other than the nic itself I don't see what could be different. Other than just overall bad performance of the drives or vmfs? What if you do iperf between vms -- what do you see then?

post-14624-0-44916300-1335455395.jpg

Question are you using the built in n40L nic for your lan connection or the add on card? I am using the built in nic on the lan side of my esxi host.

post-14624-0-46582300-1335455825.jpg

If your using the intel one - try changing to use the built in one and see if that fixes your issue?

But yeah switch was long shot at best.. But if your seeing that kind of throughput between other devices.. Then I would say its good, you could move ports maybe? Change cables to the esxi..

Just swapped out the CAT5E Cables with a couple of brand new CAT6A cables between the N36L to the switch and the N40L and the Switch. All 100% SuperPowered now.

So WTF would cause such bad performance? Did you make any tweaks to that virtual nic on the VM?

No Tweaks other than the MTU Change that we've undone.

As you saw I am getting great performance from my vms -- and other than the nic itself I don't see what could be different. Other than just overall bad performance of the drives or vmfs? What if you do iperf between vms -- what do you see then?

Between, 300Mbits/sec (that really really does point to ESXi)

Question are you using the built in n40L nic for your lan connection or the add on card? I am using the built in nic on the lan side of my esxi host.

I'm using the built-in as WAN and the expansion card as LAN.

If your using the intel one - try changing to use the built in one and see if that fixes your issue?

All VMs have been migrated over to the VMXNET3 NICs, all other than the pfSense one that is.

So you only see 300Mbps between vms testing with iperf?? Something wrong there for sure.. See my 1.55Gbps

The physical nic should not even come into play when testing iperf between vms.. So WTF else could be the problem?? hmmmmm

I would look to why your only Seeing 300Mbits thats for sure!! That is horrific!! Is there some other traffic going on at the same time?? For test I would shut down all other vms.. Just leave the 2 your testing with. And make sure they are not doing anything -- 300mbits over the virtual switch -- WTF??

No I didn't mean vmxnet3 for trying other one.. I mean what physical nic is tied to each virtual switch.. I have the built in one connected to my lan vswitch. And the addon nic is connected to my wan vswitch. But again that shouldn't have anything to do with vms talking to each other over the vswitch - it shouldn't You could always remove the nic from the vswitch as a test.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • I am not a fan of haptic feedback touchpads. I've owned a Surface Laptop 7 (Snapdragon) with one and a Lenovo Slim (Intel), and I hated both to the point where I purchased different laptops. It's not that they don't work most of the time; it's that they don't work 100% of the time, and there is no advantage from a user's perspective over a good mechanical trackpad like what's on a ThinkPad X1 or a Yoga 9i. I do not believe that I'll buy another haptic feedback touchpad laptop again in the near future.
    • Works fine here too. About this build, I don't like to download any kind of Windows, from any site except Microsoft. The mod might work, but I don't know what it's inside. Can contain malware, backdoors... Long time ago I've used something like this but reversed - it was 98se with the look and some functionality  of XP. Or, later XP with Vista look. But I made it myself. Not downloaded from obscure sites.
    • Rockstar gives last-gen GTA V players free upgrades tomorrow by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe Rockstar is preparing to launch Grand Theft Auto VI later this year, but ahead of that, the company has revealed a new offer for some Grand Theft Auto V owners. It today announced that Xbox One and PlayStation 4 version owners of the 2013-released title will soon be receiving a free upgrade to the current generation version. The studio released the Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5 version of Grand Theft Auto V back in 2022, bringing significant upgrades to the original console editions. This included 60 FPS gameplay at up to 4K resolution, as well as major upgrades to textures, draw distance, and audio. Faster load times, ray tracing elements, and HDR support were also added with it. While this new and enhanced version needed a new purchase of the game to jump in, now Rockstar has decided to make it a free upgrade, dropping the $40 price tag entirely on consoles. "Beginning tomorrow, those who own any PS4 version or the digital Xbox One version of Grand Theft Auto V will be able to upgrade to the PS5 or Xbox Series X|S versions at no additional cost, and experience the best versions of GTA V and GTA Online," said the company in an official blog post. The free upgrade offer will be released tomorrow, June 18, for all Xbox One and PlayStation 4 owners of Grand Theft Auto V. Players who will be jumping in on the offer will want to check how to migrate their GTA Online profile from last-generation to current-generation consoles by heading over here. The offer lands ahead of The Kortz Center Heist hitting Grand Theft Auto Online, where players and crews will be tasked with stealing priceless international art from a prestigious gallery in Pacific Bluffs. It doesn't look like Rockstar plans to stop updating its previous game even with Grand Theft Auto VI being on the horizon. The latest title is slated to launch on November 19, 2026, across Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5.
    • Now comes with a money back guarantee instead of a replacement! Hah
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Vincian earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • First Post
      Jocimo earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      suprememobiles48 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Prasann earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      511
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      89
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      76
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!