From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <hongyi.zhao@gmail.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 007376A556 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 05:38:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E64471C229 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 05:38:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com (mail-lf1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::131]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 77C221C21F for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 05:38:16 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id q25so54742864lfc.8 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Sun, 14 Mar 2021 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=zgi2bs/hqngkPK5dVVmJ9Xyt4qw5gKgiPtJ/IjEOO24=; b=n491qU6IDXxsRJyUWEw/TEMbTiiHJcn+vhY23vSbtcMBj82VNW4oOidm6tKK+uuPEM cNHfcmxi8MWy/+wLETP68Ru2YNgJBlET1SzcesKHzPJ3OrxyOtG7E+RXuW6EnSV74Cph Hmw8CJO8KlzXnYrunUgVL5LqRJIXwbX4IlZRD40Nchk8qV9n1gCRCxpNyKHv/rbbohq/ yIzdLXNcwpggcEeLoUGOgb+y7s7Is/CBUDV6KW1fHcJ1YeFi3nMyjU2SDOwRYVAn7FXc m8DlBng8M5REDVK6AQLK6Fl57Df4OQ/hndsbimxSYy9agOgqb1sYRMPuFVr9H6a4+OJy zdXw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=zgi2bs/hqngkPK5dVVmJ9Xyt4qw5gKgiPtJ/IjEOO24=; b=YCUjBEp2aD5LaCdGVE67hCsKLvm+WCYnMaBxBgsTIXLz44YjzY2FIZbWivE6UpIDJL tFUvv21Fk/OmvX+Y1WXyReoa2oAZptUZvxIF2xkQjIjVdUwSht1PVEqBsB9DhOjm1u2E qZ9ryRTtOzks+/1lYZ5TilkGLDxe0RTPFRv6gC+XQaLg2+EaKs/jK2qE0pvlY27bkZfe S5ZlyWL/zyo8UhAb3KS71KKr/xB5+/Yb+yLQdwca22GGMRUcSKd6JE7beY8oeIt7X27N mUlp3UYCzscJwWkYKn6fONKRYnf+fh6nhYSVkcG23M4CWSeVHFEXX+Os8B5IuN0vWQVJ r6Jw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530wkUQA6pNcBpEKYYQQ+5gvLDeGshiLl3gv83VMa78rQnnxIV/m kLRNPcNLPuboeYPwFrfB5bpxeeFFubsE3JlU0znh75DCme6daAt9 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx0IY/XCn/qmndEu4qwczNUxl39Zd6IBmSoyP1mhwtgYH/Up7MDducSDcviI356Jzw9UvgkZHr10k3XJ+KJfB8= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:53b5:: with SMTP id j21mr7158200lfh.75.1615783089483; Sun, 14 Mar 2021 21:38:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <CAGP6PO+ufdPXvKRi=B=yhjsZWCnQJ2HFiZ=iJ0t586+n38F42Q@mail.gmail.com> <67f6fcec-ae6b-2ebe-a104-84f4c2a6008f@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <67f6fcec-ae6b-2ebe-a104-84f4c2a6008f@gmail.com> From: Hongyi Zhao <hongyi.zhao@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 12:37:57 +0800 Message-ID: <CAGP6POKQVu6sBhWbRRa4qmiZYxakLRaOwJLT8881TF3PFWQxwQ@mail.gmail.com> To: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain FREEMAIL_FROM 0.001 Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [PVE-User] The low network throughput obsered on Open vSwitch bridge. X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-user/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:38:17 -0000 On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:00 PM Dmitry Petuhov <mityapetuhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello. > > That's how TCP throughput mediation works. In basic case, you cannot > canot fully saturate link by two opposite TCP connections regardless of > using Open vSwitch. > > There's one dirty hack that can override this behavior: you could use > qdisc on interface that prioritize packets that have ACK bit set over > those that don't in same connection. It will saturate link, but may lead > to other issues on certain types of traffic (because of packet > reordering), so [almost] nobody use it in real life. > > Multiple parallel connections in same direction also saturate link more > evenly. Thanks a lot for your help and explanation. But I still can't understand why the speed observed from pve (192.168.10.254) to another physical machine (192.168.10.100) is always higher than that observed in the reverse direction. Any hints for this phenomenon? Regards -- Assoc. Prof. Hongyi Zhao <hongyi.zhao@gmail.com> Theory and Simulation of Materials Hebei Polytechnic University of Science and Technology engineering NO. 552 North Gangtie Road, Xingtai, China