Proxmox 3.0 - Network Performance Problem

F

FastLaneJB

Renowned Member
Feb 3, 2012
91
8
73
Hi,

OK I've got a bandwidth issue with Proxmox where it's not running nearly as fast as I think it should be. I'm using iperf to test speed.

Here's my current network setup... Switch is setup for bonding and this seems to be working fine according to the kernel messages and I can remove a NIC or two without issues. eth4 is PCI passed through to a pfSense VM so not used here.

Code: 
# network interface settings
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback

iface eth0 inet manual

iface eth1 inet manual

iface eth2 inet manual

iface eth3 inet manual

auto bond0
iface bond0 inet manual
        slaves eth0 eth1 eth2
        bond_miimon 100
        bond_mode 802.3ad

auto vmbr0
iface vmbr0 inet static
        address  172.28.18.250
        netmask  255.255.255.0
        gateway  172.28.18.1
        bridge_ports bond0
        bridge_stp off
        bridge_fd 0

So iperf performance from Proxmox to OpenVZ container (Ubuntu 12.04 64bit)...

Code: 
Client connecting to 172.28.18.250, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 23.8 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 172.28.18.25 port 44465 connected with 172.28.18.250 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.2 sec  2.49 GBytes  2.10 Gbits/sec

That seems fine to me. More than 1 Gigabit which is all I really need.

KVM Windows Server 2012 with VirtIO Disk and Network to Proxmox host.

Code: 
Client connecting to 172.28.18.250, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 172.28.18.15 port 55690 connected with 172.28.18.250 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec  2.56 GBytes  2.19 Gbits/sec

This is also fine, very similar to OpenVZ and the CPU usage jumps up but isn't maxing the machine at all, not even 50% of 2 virtual CPU's.

From the Server 2012 KVM machine to OpenVZ (Ubuntu 12.04) I get

Code: 
Client connecting to kt-download, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 172.28.18.15 port 55694 connected with 172.28.18.25 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec  1.09 GBytes   932 Mbits/sec

Slower but I could live with that. Though not sure why as both these VM's are on the same host.

Now if I do a KVM Windows 7 VM with VirtIO to the Server 2012 KVM machine I get...

Code: 
------------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  4] local 172.28.18.15 port 5001 connected with 172.28.18.114 port 50977
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  4]  0.0-10.1 sec   145 MBytes   121 Mbits/sec

This is awful. It's still on the same host.

From an external Windows 7 machine to the Proxmox host I get...

Code: 
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 172.28.18.250, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 172.28.18.249 port 63489 connected with 172.28.18.250 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec   425 MBytes   357 Mbits/sec

Not good as it's Gigabit at each end.

To the Server 2012 KVM from the Windows 7 physical machine

Code: 
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to kt-file, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 172.28.18.249 port 63519 connected with 172.28.18.15 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec   312 MBytes   261 Mbits/sec

It's got slower...

Windows 7 machine to a physical Windows Server 2012 machine, both gigabit but across 2 different switches where as Windows 7 machine is on same switch as the Proxmox host.

Code: 
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 172.28.18.6, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 172.28.18.249 port 63550 connected with 172.28.18.6 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec   763 MBytes   640 Mbits/sec

Sorry for so many test but something has to be wrong with my proxmox networking somewhere. This machine was running Server 2012 before hand with much better performance.

Any ideas on how I can improve this so the VM's can at least max a Gigabit link? I was hoping I could max a couple of them to different machines seeing as I've bonded but cannot even do a single one currently.
 
tom said:
if you want to optimize windows networking, see http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Paravirtualized_Network_Drivers_for_Windows

(you need to do some registry changes).
Click to expand...

Hi Tom,

I'm not sure it's Windows. I could maybe optimize it somewhat but this server with Windows 2012 / ESXi or such can pump more bandwidth to the network than I am able to get with Proxmox / Debian 7. Here's from the Windows 7 physical machine to an OpenVZ Ubuntu 12.04 64bit container.

Code: 
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to kt-download, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 172.28.18.249 port 65429 connected with 172.28.18.25 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec   490 MBytes   411 Mbits/sec

It's going basically at the same speed I can to the host but the speed from the host to this machine is much slower than it really should be.

The other concern is the KVM Windows VM with VirtIO with KVM Windows VM with VirtIO can only do a bit over 100Mbit but both are on the same bridged network so the traffic shouldn't even be leaving the host + NIC's are each 1 Gigabit anyway. Any idea why that test was so much slower?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom