[netperf-talk] Issues using parallel sessions of netperf

[Srikanth Sundaresan]

On Apr 13, 2011, at 6:32 PM, Rick Jones wrote:

> 
>>>>>> Here's a sample output:
>>>>>> bin/netperf -l30 -P0 -fk -t TCP_MAERTS -p14536 143.215.129.122
>>>>>> bin/netperf -l30 -P0 -fk -t TCP_MAERTS -p14536 143.215.129.122
>>>>>> bin/netperf -l30 -P0 -fk -t TCP_MAERTS -p14536 143.215.129.122
>> 
>> I actually think your problem is because you're specifying port number,
>> there are some bugs in that area AFAIR.
> 
> The port number being specified is for the control port, which as near
> as I can recall has been fairly solid going back quite a ways.
> 
>> I assume on the above that you forgot the -H option?
> 
> Indeed he did.  Thanks for catching that. Not entirely sure what that
> will mean.  If it were not for the -P 0 then the test destination would
> appear in the banner for a sanity check.
> 

The -H is because the script output (which prints the command) has a bug, the command that it executes has the -H option.
One thing that I noticed just a while ago is that it wasn't just netperf that has this problem; I was testing iperf with multiple threads, and some threads hung too. A labmate here suggested I turn off iptables on the server. This seemed to an impact - a lot of the netperf tests are completing (5 out of 5 successful tests). I will loop the tests overnight to see if iptables was indeed the problem. If not, I will post systrace and also try the burst suggestion.