Expand the fast ethernet guide
This commit is contained in:
@@ -19,11 +19,13 @@
|
|||||||
- [Reverse proxy](#reverse-proxy)
|
- [Reverse proxy](#reverse-proxy)
|
||||||
- [Operating system](#operating-system)
|
- [Operating system](#operating-system)
|
||||||
- [Kernel](#kernel)
|
- [Kernel](#kernel)
|
||||||
|
- [That's all, folks!](#thats-all-folks)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Introduction
|
## Introduction
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
You might have just downloaded a 10 GB file in 20 seconds and wondered how that
|
If you are one of the lucky few who has a fast enough connection, you might have
|
||||||
is even possible. Well, it took a lot of effort to get there.
|
just downloaded a 5 GB file in 10 seconds and wondered how that is even
|
||||||
|
possible. Well, it took a lot of effort to get there.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
When I first ordered a 100 GbE server I expected things to just work. Imagine my
|
When I first ordered a 100 GbE server I expected things to just work. Imagine my
|
||||||
surprise when the server crashed when serving at just 20 Gigabit.
|
surprise when the server crashed when serving at just 20 Gigabit.
|
||||||
@@ -31,13 +33,21 @@ surprise when the server crashed when serving at just 20 Gigabit.
|
|||||||
Then I expected my server host to be able to help with the performance problems.
|
Then I expected my server host to be able to help with the performance problems.
|
||||||
Spoiler alert: They could not help me.
|
Spoiler alert: They could not help me.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
That's where my journey into the rabbit hole of network performance started. It
|
That's where my journey into the rabbit hole of network performance started. I
|
||||||
took me just about a year to figure out all the details of high speed
|
paid good money for that 100 Gigabit connection and I'll be damned if I can't
|
||||||
networking, and now pixeldrain can finally serve files at 100 Gigabit per
|
use all of it. I'm getting to the bottom of this no matter how long it takes...
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It took me well over a year to figure out all the details of high speed
|
||||||
|
networking. My good friend Jeff (who has been hosting pixeldrain for nearly ten
|
||||||
|
years now) was able to point me in the right direction by showing me some
|
||||||
|
sysctls and ethtool commands which might affect performance. That was just the
|
||||||
|
entrance of the rabbit hole though, and this one carried on deep. After about a
|
||||||
|
year of trial and error pixeldrain can finally serve files at 100 Gigabit per
|
||||||
second.
|
second.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Below is a summary of everything I discovered during my year of reading NIC
|
Below is a summary of everything I discovered during my year of reading NIC
|
||||||
manuals, digging through the kernel sources and patching the kernel.
|
manuals, digging through the kernel sources, running profilers, patching the
|
||||||
|
kernel, learning about CPU topology and TCP inner workings.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Sysctls
|
## Sysctls
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@@ -170,8 +180,9 @@ memory pages. A memory page is usually 4096B. Here is what these three values me
|
|||||||
limited.
|
limited.
|
||||||
* `pressure`: When the TCP memory usage exceeds this threshold it will try to
|
* `pressure`: When the TCP memory usage exceeds this threshold it will try to
|
||||||
shrink some TCP buffers to free up memory. It will keep doing this until
|
shrink some TCP buffers to free up memory. It will keep doing this until
|
||||||
memory usage drops below `low` again. You don't want to set `low` and
|
memory usage drops below `low` again. Shrinking TCP buffers takes a lot of
|
||||||
`pressure` too far apart.
|
CPU time, and during this time no data is sent to the client. You don't want
|
||||||
|
to set `low` and `pressure` too far apart.
|
||||||
* `high`: The TCP system can't allocate more than this number of pages. If this
|
* `high`: The TCP system can't allocate more than this number of pages. If this
|
||||||
limit is reached and a new TCP session is opened it will not be able to
|
limit is reached and a new TCP session is opened it will not be able to
|
||||||
allocate any memory. Needless to say this is terrible for performance.
|
allocate any memory. Needless to say this is terrible for performance.
|
||||||
@@ -197,14 +208,23 @@ I set these values dynamically per host with Ansible:
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
There are lots of NICs to choose from. From my testing there are a lot of bad
|
There are lots of NICs to choose from. From my testing there are a lot of bad
|
||||||
apples in the bunch. The only NIC types I have had any luck with are ConnectX-5
|
apples in the bunch. The only NIC types I have had any luck with are ConnectX-5
|
||||||
and ConnectX-6.
|
and ConnectX-6. Intel's E810 NICs are also not terrible, but Nvidia cards seem
|
||||||
|
to fare better with high connection counts. I currently have two servers with
|
||||||
|
E810 cards and two servers with ConnectX-6 cards. The E810 cards are usually the
|
||||||
|
first to crap out during a load peak. NICs are just fickle beasts overall. I
|
||||||
|
don't know if my experiences are actually related to the quality of the cards,
|
||||||
|
or just bad luck with faulty hardware.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Often you see advice to install a proprietary driver for your NIC. Don't do
|
Often you see advice to install a proprietary driver for your NIC. Don't do
|
||||||
that. In my experience that has only caused problems. Nvidia's NIC drivers are
|
that. In my experience that has only caused problems. Nvidia's NIC drivers are
|
||||||
just as shitty as their video drivers. They will break kernel updates and
|
just as shitty as their video drivers. They will break kernel updates and
|
||||||
generally make your life miserable.
|
generally make your life miserable. The drivers in the Linux kernel are good and
|
||||||
|
well maintained. You don't need to taint your kernel with some scary proprietary
|
||||||
|
blob.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Upgrading the firmware for your NIC can be a good idea.
|
Upgrading the firmware for your NIC can be a good idea, if you can figure out
|
||||||
|
how, that is. Nvidia's tools for upgrading firmware are a huge hassle to work
|
||||||
|
with and the documentation is outdated and scarce.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## ethtool
|
## ethtool
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@@ -227,7 +247,10 @@ it's not that big of a problem.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
If you are running on a multi-CPU platform you only want one CPU to communicate
|
If you are running on a multi-CPU platform you only want one CPU to communicate
|
||||||
with the NIC. Distributing your channels over multiple CPUs will cause cache
|
with the NIC. Distributing your channels over multiple CPUs will cause cache
|
||||||
thrashing which absolutely tanks performance.
|
thrashing which absolutely tanks performance. Many of pixeldrain's server are
|
||||||
|
dual CPU, where one CPU runs the pixeldrain software and the other only
|
||||||
|
communicates with the NIC. Buying a $10k CPU just to talk to a NIC is a bit
|
||||||
|
wasteful, I recommend just using one CPU if you have the choice.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Your NIC will usually configure the channels correctly on boot, so in most of
|
Your NIC will usually configure the channels correctly on boot, so in most of
|
||||||
the cases you don't need to change anything here. You can query the settings
|
the cases you don't need to change anything here. You can query the settings
|
||||||
@@ -236,46 +259,49 @@ $INTERFACE combined 63`.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
### Ring buffers (ethtool -g)
|
### Ring buffers (ethtool -g)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The ring buffers are queues where the NIC stores your IP packets before they are
|
The ring buffers are portions of RAM where the NIC stores your IP packets before
|
||||||
sent out to the network (tx) or sent to the CPU (rx). Increasing the ring buffer
|
they are sent out to the network (tx) or sent to the CPU (rx). Increasing the
|
||||||
sizes can increase network latency a little bit because more packets are getting
|
ring buffer sizes can increase network latency a little bit because more packets
|
||||||
buffered before being sent out to the network. But again, at 100 GbE this
|
are getting buffered before being sent out to the network. But again, at 100 GbE
|
||||||
happens so fast that the difference is in the order of microseconds, that makes
|
this happens so fast that the difference is in the order of microseconds, that
|
||||||
absolutely no difference to us.
|
makes absolutely no difference to us. We just want to move as much data as
|
||||||
|
possible in as little time as possible.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
If we can buffer more packets then it means we can transfer more data in bulk
|
If we can buffer more packets then it means we can transfer more data in bulk
|
||||||
with every clock cycle. So we simply set this to the maximum. For Mellanox cards
|
with every clock cycle. So we simply set this to the maximum. For Mellanox cards
|
||||||
the maximum is usually `8192`, but this can vary. Check the maximum values for
|
the maximum is usually `8192`, but this can vary. Check the maximum values for
|
||||||
your card with `ethtool -g $INTERFACE`.
|
your card with `ethtool -g $INTERFACE`.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
`ethtool -G $INTERFACE rx 8192 tx 8192`
|
Set the receive and send buffers to 8192 packets: `ethtool -G $INTERFACE rx 8192
|
||||||
|
tx 8192`
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Interrupt Coalescing (ethtool -c)
|
### Interrupt Coalescing (ethtool -c)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The NIC can't just write your packets to the CPU and expect it to do something
|
The NIC can't just write your packets to the CPU and expect it to do something
|
||||||
with them. Your CPU needs to be made aware that there is new data to process.
|
with them. Your CPU needs to be made aware that there is new data to process.
|
||||||
That happens with interrupts. Ethtool's interrupt coalescing values tell the NIC
|
That happens with an interrupt. Ethtool's interrupt coalescing values tell the
|
||||||
when and how to send interrupts to the CPU. This is a delicate balance. We don't
|
NIC when and how to send interrupts to the CPU. This is a delicate balance. We
|
||||||
want to interrupt the CPU too often, because then it won't be able to get any
|
don't want to interrupt the CPU too often, because then it won't be able to get
|
||||||
work done. That's like getting a new ping in team chat every half hour, how are
|
any work done. That's like getting a new ping in team chat every half hour, how
|
||||||
you supposed to concentrate like that? But if we set the interrupt rate too
|
are you supposed to concentrate like that? But if we set the interrupt rate too
|
||||||
slow, the NIC won't be able to send all packets in time.
|
slow, the NIC won't be able to send all packets in time before the buffers fill
|
||||||
|
up.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The interrupt coalescing options vary a lot per NIC type.. These are the ones
|
The interrupt coalescing options vary a lot per NIC type.. These are the ones
|
||||||
which are present on my ConnectX-6 Dx: `rx-usecs`, `rx-frames`, `tx-usecs`,
|
which are present on my ConnectX-6 Dx: `rx-usecs`, `rx-frames`, `tx-usecs`,
|
||||||
`tx-frames`, `cqe-mode-rx`, `cqe-mode-tx`. I'll explain what these are one by
|
`tx-frames`, `cqe-mode-rx`, `cqe-mode-tx`. I'll explain what these are:
|
||||||
one:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* `rx-usecs`, `tx-usecs`: These values dictate how often the NIC interrupts the
|
* `rx-usecs`, `tx-usecs`: These values dictate how often the NIC interrupts the
|
||||||
CPU to receive packets `rx` or send packets `tx`. The value is in
|
CPU to receive packets `rx` or send packets `tx`. The value is in
|
||||||
microseconds. The SI prefix for micro is µ, but for convenience they use the
|
microseconds. The SI prefix for micro is µ, but for convenience they use the
|
||||||
letter u here. A microsecond is one-millionth of a second.
|
letter u here. A microsecond is one-millionth of a second.
|
||||||
* `rx-frames`, `tx-frames`: Like the values above this defines how often the
|
* `rx-frames`, `tx-frames`: Like the values above this defines how often the
|
||||||
CPU is interrupted, but instead of interrupting the CPU at fixed moments it
|
CPU is interrupted, but instead of interrupting the CPU at a fixed interval
|
||||||
interrupts the CPU when a certain number of packets is in the buffer.
|
it interrupts the CPU when a certain number of packets are in the buffer.
|
||||||
* `cqe-mode-rx`, `cqe-mode-tx`: These options enable packet compression in the
|
* `cqe-mode-rx`, `cqe-mode-tx`: These options enable packet compression in the
|
||||||
PCI bus. This is handy if your PCI bus is overloaded. In most cases it's best
|
PCI bus. This is handy if your PCI bus is a bottleneck, like when your 100G
|
||||||
to leave this at the default value.
|
NIC is plugged into 4x PCI 4.0 lanes, which only has 7.88 GB/s bandwidth. In
|
||||||
|
most cases it's best to leave these at the default value.
|
||||||
* `adaptive-rx`, `adaptive-tx`: These values tell the NIC to calculate its own
|
* `adaptive-rx`, `adaptive-tx`: These values tell the NIC to calculate its own
|
||||||
interrupt timings. This disregards the values we configure ourselves. The
|
interrupt timings. This disregards the values we configure ourselves. The
|
||||||
timings calculated by the NIC often prefer low latency over throughput and
|
timings calculated by the NIC often prefer low latency over throughput and
|
||||||
@@ -285,21 +311,23 @@ one:
|
|||||||
So what are good values for these? Well, we can do some math here. Our NIC can
|
So what are good values for these? Well, we can do some math here. Our NIC can
|
||||||
send 100 Gigabits per second. That's 12.5 GB. A network packet is usually 1500
|
send 100 Gigabits per second. That's 12.5 GB. A network packet is usually 1500
|
||||||
bytes. This means that we need to send 8333333 packets per second to reach full
|
bytes. This means that we need to send 8333333 packets per second to reach full
|
||||||
speed. Our ring buffer can hold 8192 packets, so if we divide that number again
|
speed. Our ring buffer can hold 8192 packets, so if we divide by that number we
|
||||||
we learn that we need to send 1017 full ring buffers per second to reach full
|
learn that we need to send 1017 entire ring buffers per second to reach full
|
||||||
speed.
|
speed.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Waiting for the ring buffer to be completely full is probably not a good idea,
|
Waiting for the ring buffer to be completely full is probably not a good idea,
|
||||||
since then we can't add more packets until the previous packets have been copied
|
since then we can't add more packets until the previous packets have been copied
|
||||||
out. So we want to be able to empty the ring buffer twice. That leaves us with
|
out. So we want to be able to empty the ring buffer twice. That leaves us with
|
||||||
ring buffers per second. Now convert that buffers per second number to µs per
|
2034 ring buffers per second. Now convert that buffers per second number to µs
|
||||||
buffer: `1000000 / 2034 = 492µs`, we land on a value of 492µs per interrupt.
|
per buffer: `1000000 / 2034 = 492µs`, we land on a value of 492µs per interrupt.
|
||||||
This is our ceiling value. Higher than this and the buffers will overflow. But
|
This is our ceiling value. Higher than this and the buffers will overflow. But
|
||||||
492µs is nearly half a millisecond, that's an eternity in CPU time. That's high
|
492µs is nearly half a millisecond, that's an eternity in CPU time. That's high
|
||||||
enough that it might actually make a measurable difference in packet latency. So
|
enough that it might actually make a measurable difference in packet latency. So
|
||||||
we opt for a safe value of 100µs instead. That still gives the CPU plenty of
|
we opt for a more sane value of 100µs instead. That still gives the CPU plenty
|
||||||
time to do other work in between interrupts, but is low enough to barely make a
|
of time to do other work in between interrupts. A 3 GHz CPU core will be able to
|
||||||
measurable difference in latency.
|
perform about 30000 calculations inbetween each interrupt. At the same time it's
|
||||||
|
low enough to barely make a measurable difference in latency, at most a tenth of
|
||||||
|
a millisecond.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
As for the `{rx,tx}-frames` variables. We just spent all that time calculating
|
As for the `{rx,tx}-frames` variables. We just spent all that time calculating
|
||||||
the ideal interrupt interval, I don't really want the NIC to start interrupting
|
the ideal interrupt interval, I don't really want the NIC to start interrupting
|
||||||
@@ -315,7 +343,7 @@ ethtool -C $INTERFACE adaptive-rx off adaptive-tx off \
|
|||||||
rx-frames 8192 tx-frames 8192
|
rx-frames 8192 tx-frames 8192
|
||||||
```
|
```
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Tip: If you want to see how much time your CPU is spending in handling
|
Tip: If you want to see how much time your CPU is spending on handling
|
||||||
interrupts, go into `htop`, then to Setup (F2) and enable "Detailed CPU time"
|
interrupts, go into `htop`, then to Setup (F2) and enable "Detailed CPU time"
|
||||||
under Display options. The CPU gauge will now show time spent on handling
|
under Display options. The CPU gauge will now show time spent on handling
|
||||||
interrupts in purple. Press F10 to save changes.
|
interrupts in purple. Press F10 to save changes.
|
||||||
@@ -328,10 +356,13 @@ most important optimizations must be configured here.
|
|||||||
### NUMA Nodes per socket
|
### NUMA Nodes per socket
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Big CPUs with lots of cores often segment their memory into NUMA nodes. These
|
Big CPUs with lots of cores often segment their memory into NUMA nodes. These
|
||||||
smaller nodes can coordinate better with each other because they are close to
|
smaller nodes get exclusive access to a certain portion of RAM and don't have to
|
||||||
each other. But one downside is that the segmentation causes performance
|
contend over memory access with the other NUMA nodes. This can improve your
|
||||||
problems with NIC queues. Because of this you always need to set `NUMA nodes per
|
performance... if your software supports it well. But from my testing the setup
|
||||||
socket` to `NPS1`.
|
of one NIC queue per core does not combine well with having multiple NUMA nodes.
|
||||||
|
The fact that I use Go, which does not have a NUMA aware scheduler as far as I
|
||||||
|
know, probably does not help either. For these reasons I prefer to set `NUMA
|
||||||
|
nodes per socket` to `NPS1`.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Some AMD BIOSes also have an option called `ACPI SRAT L3 Cache as NUMA Domain`.
|
Some AMD BIOSes also have an option called `ACPI SRAT L3 Cache as NUMA Domain`.
|
||||||
This will create NUMA nodes based on the L3 cache topology, *even if you
|
This will create NUMA nodes based on the L3 cache topology, *even if you
|
||||||
@@ -347,39 +378,56 @@ performance.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
Most apps have no way to effectively use hundreds of CPU threads. At some point
|
Most apps have no way to effectively use hundreds of CPU threads. At some point
|
||||||
adding more threads will only consume more memory and CPU cycles just because
|
adding more threads will only consume more memory and CPU cycles just because
|
||||||
they kernel scheduler and memory controller has to manage all those threads. My
|
they kernel scheduler, memory controller and your language runtime have to
|
||||||
rule of thumb: If you have more than 64 threads: `SMT OFF`
|
manage all those threads. This can cause huge amounts of overhead. My rule of
|
||||||
|
thumb: If you have 64 or more cores: `SMT OFF`
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### IOMMU
|
### IOMMU
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The [Input-output memory management
|
The [Input-output memory management
|
||||||
unit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input%E2%80%93output_memory_management_unit)
|
unit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input%E2%80%93output_memory_management_unit)
|
||||||
is a CPU component for virtualizing your memory access. This can be useful if
|
is a CPU component for virtualizing your memory access. This can be useful if
|
||||||
you run a lot of VMs for example. You know what it's also good for? **COMPLETELY
|
you run a lot of VMs for example. You know what it's also good for? **Completely
|
||||||
DESTROYING NIC PERFORMANCE**.
|
destroying NIC performance**.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A high end NIC needs to shuffle a lot of data over the PCI bus. When the IOMMU
|
A high end NIC needs to shuffle a lot of data over the PCI bus. A 100 GbE NIC in
|
||||||
is enabled that means that the data needs to be shuffled through the IOMMU first
|
full duplex can reach up to 25 GB/s! When the IOMMU is enabled it means that all
|
||||||
before it can go into memory. This adds some latency. When you are running a
|
the data that the NIC sends/receives needs to go through the IOMMU first before
|
||||||
|
it can go into RAM. This adds a little bit of latency. When you are running a
|
||||||
high end NIC in your PCI slot, then the added latency makes sure that your NIC
|
high end NIC in your PCI slot, then the added latency makes sure that your NIC
|
||||||
will *never ever reach the advertised speed*. In some cases the overhead is so
|
will **never ever get anywhwere near the advertised speed**. In some cases the
|
||||||
large that the NIC will effectively drop off the PCI bus, immediately crashing
|
overhead is so large that the NIC will effectively drop off the PCI bus,
|
||||||
your system once it gets only slightly overloaded.
|
immediately crashing your system once it gets only slightly overloaded. Yes,
|
||||||
|
really, I have seen this happen.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Seriously, if you have a high end NIC plugged into your PCI slot and you have
|
Seriously, if you have a high end NIC plugged into your PCI slot and you have
|
||||||
the IOMMU enabled. **You might as well plug a fucking brick into your PCI
|
the IOMMU enabled. **You might as well plug a goddamn brick into your PCI
|
||||||
slot**, because that's about how useful your expensive NIC will be.
|
slot**, because that's about as useful as your expensive NIC will be.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
It took me way too long to find this information. The difference between IOMMU
|
It took me way too long to find this information. The difference between IOMMU
|
||||||
off and on is night and day. I am actually **furious** that it took me this long
|
off and on is night and day. I am actually **furious** that it took me so long
|
||||||
to discover this. All the NIC tuning guides talk about is tweaking little
|
to discover this. I spent *weeks* pulling hair out of my head trying to figure
|
||||||
ethtool params and shit like that, the IOMMU was completely omitted. I was
|
out why my NIC was locking up whenever I tried to put any real load on it. All
|
||||||
getting so desperate with my terrible NIC performance that I just started
|
the NIC tuning guides I could find talk about tweaking little ethtool params,
|
||||||
flipping toggles in the BIOS to see if anything made a difference, that's how I
|
installing drivers, updating firmware and useles crap like that, the IOMMU was
|
||||||
discovered that the IOMMU was the source of **all my problems**.
|
completely omitted in every one of them. I was getting so desperate with my
|
||||||
|
terrible NIC performance that I just started flipping toggles in the BIOS to see
|
||||||
|
if anything made a difference. If you have any idea how long it takes to reboot
|
||||||
|
a high end server system you know how tedious this is. That's how I discovered
|
||||||
|
that the IOMMU was the source of **all my problems**.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Ugh, just thinking about all the time I wasted because because nobody told me to
|
||||||
|
just turn the IOMMU off gets my blood boiling. That's why I am writing this
|
||||||
|
guide, I want to spare you the suffering.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
So yea... `AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > IOMMU > Disabled` ...AND STAY DOWN!
|
So yea... `AMD CBS > NBIO Common Options > IOMMU > Disabled` ...AND STAY DOWN!
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I also just turn off anything related to virtualization nowadays. Having
|
||||||
|
virtualization options enabled when you are not running VMs is a waste of
|
||||||
|
resources. No worries, docker is not virtualization, it's just namespacing,
|
||||||
|
nothing virtual about that. And if you are running VMs.. well, consider bare
|
||||||
|
metal. It's really not that scary and there is lots of performance to be gained.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
You can verify that your IOMMU is disabled with this command `dmesg | grep
|
You can verify that your IOMMU is disabled with this command `dmesg | grep
|
||||||
iommu`. Your IOMMU is disabled if it prints something along the lines of:
|
iommu`. Your IOMMU is disabled if it prints something along the lines of:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@@ -391,30 +439,34 @@ iommu`. Your IOMMU is disabled if it prints something along the lines of:
|
|||||||
If you see more output than that, you need to drop into the BIOS and nuke that
|
If you see more output than that, you need to drop into the BIOS and nuke that
|
||||||
shit immediately.
|
shit immediately.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
One little caveat is that Linux requires the IOMMU to support more than 255 CPU
|
||||||
|
threads. So if you have 256 threads and the IOMMU is turned off one of your
|
||||||
|
threads will be disabled. So once again I will repeat my rule of thumb with
|
||||||
|
regards to multithreading: If you have 64 or more cores: `SMT OFF`
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Reverse proxy
|
## Reverse proxy
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A lot of sites run behind a reverse proxy like nginx or Caddy. It seems to be an
|
A lot of sites run behind a reverse proxy like nginx or Caddy. It seems to be an
|
||||||
industry standard nowadays. People are surprised when they learn that pixeldrain
|
industry standard nowadays. People are surprised when they learn that pixeldrain
|
||||||
does not use a web server like nginx or Caddy.
|
does not use one of the standard web servers.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Turns out that 100 Gigabit per second is a lot of data. It takes a considerable
|
As it turns out, 100 Gigabit per second is a lot of data. It takes a
|
||||||
amount of CPU time to churn through that much data, so ideally you want to touch
|
considerable amount of CPU time to churn through that much data, so ideally you
|
||||||
it as few times as you can. And when you are moving that much data the memcpy
|
want to touch it as few times as you can. At this scale playing hot potato with
|
||||||
overhead really starts to show its true face. At this scale playing hot potato
|
your HTTP requests is a really bad idea.
|
||||||
with your HTTP requests is a really bad idea.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A big bottleneck with networking on Linux is copying data across the kernel
|
A big bottleneck with networking on Linux is copying data across the kernel
|
||||||
boundary. The kernel always needs to copy your buffers because userspace is
|
boundary. The kernel always needs to copy your buffers because userspace is
|
||||||
dirty, would not want to share memory with that. When you are running a reverse
|
dirty, ew, would not want to share memory with that. When you are running a
|
||||||
proxy every request is effectively crossing the kernel boundary *six times*.
|
reverse proxy every HTTP request is effectively crossing the kernel boundary
|
||||||
Let's assume we're running nginx here, the client sends a request to the server.
|
*six times*. Let's assume we're running nginx here, the client sends a request
|
||||||
The kernel copies the request body from kernel space to nginx's listener (from
|
to the server. The kernel copies the request body from kernel space to nginx's
|
||||||
kernel space to userspace), nginx opens a request to your app and copies the
|
listener (from kernel space to userspace), nginx opens a request to your app and
|
||||||
body the to localhost TCP socket (back to kernel space). The kernel sends the
|
copies the body the to localhost TCP socket (back to kernel space). The kernel
|
||||||
body to your app's listener on localhost (now it's in userspace again). And then
|
sends the body to your app's listener on localhost (now it's in userspace
|
||||||
the response body follows the same path again. Request: NIC -> kernel ->
|
again). And then the response body follows the same path again. Request: NIC ->
|
||||||
userspace -> kernel -> userspace. Response: userspace -> kernel -> userspace ->
|
kernel -> userspace -> kernel -> userspace. Response: userspace -> kernel ->
|
||||||
kernel -> NIC. That's crazy inefficient.
|
userspace -> kernel -> NIC. That's crazy inefficient.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
That's why pixeldrain just uses Go's built in HTTP server. Go's HTTP server is
|
That's why pixeldrain just uses Go's built in HTTP server. Go's HTTP server is
|
||||||
very complete. Everything you need is there:
|
very complete. Everything you need is there:
|
||||||
@@ -429,19 +481,47 @@ very complete. Everything you need is there:
|
|||||||
The only requirement is that your app is written in Go. Of course other
|
The only requirement is that your app is written in Go. Of course other
|
||||||
languages also have libraries for this.
|
languages also have libraries for this.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Zero-downtime restarts are a bit tricky. Luckily the geniuses tinkering away at
|
||||||
|
the Linux kernel every day made something neat for us. It's called
|
||||||
|
`SO_REUSEPORT` (Wow! Catchy name!). By putting this socket option on your TCP
|
||||||
|
listener you allow future instances of your server process to listen on the same
|
||||||
|
port at the same time. By doing this your upgrades become really quite simple:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
1. Upload new server executable to the server.
|
||||||
|
2. Start the new executable up.
|
||||||
|
3. When everything is initialized it starts listening on the same port as the
|
||||||
|
previous process using `SO_REUSEPORT`.
|
||||||
|
4. After the listener is installed we signal to the old server process (which is
|
||||||
|
still running at this point) that it can start shutting down. The listener is
|
||||||
|
closed and the active HTTP requests are gracefully completed.
|
||||||
|
5. Once the old listener is closed all new requests will go to the new process
|
||||||
|
and the upgrade is complete.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Now there may be one question on your mind: How do I signal to the previous
|
||||||
|
process that the new process has finished initializing? I have just the thing
|
||||||
|
for you. [This handy-dandy library that I
|
||||||
|
made](https://github.com/Fornaxian/zerodown). I use it for pixeldrain and it
|
||||||
|
works like a charm. Your software updates are just one `SIGHUP` away from being
|
||||||
|
deployed.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Operating system
|
## Operating system
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Choose something up-to-date, light and minimalist. Pixeldrain used to run on
|
Choose something up-to-date, lightweight and minimalist. Pixeldrain used to run
|
||||||
Ubuntu because I was familiar with it, but after a while Ubuntu server got more
|
on Ubuntu because I was familiar with it, but over time Ubuntu server got more
|
||||||
bloated and heavy. Unnecessary stuff was being added with each new release
|
bloated and heavy. Unnecessary stuff was being added with each new release
|
||||||
(looking at you snapd), and I just didn't want to deal with that. Eventually I
|
(looking at you snapd), and I just didn't want to deal with that. Eventually I
|
||||||
switched to Debian.
|
switched to Debian.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Debian is much better than Ubuntu. After booting it for the first time there
|
Debian is so much better than Ubuntu. After booting it for the first time there
|
||||||
will only be like 10 processes running on the system, just the essentials. It
|
will only be like 10 processes running on the system, just the essentials. It
|
||||||
really is a clean sandbox waiting for you to build a castle in it. It might take
|
really is a clean sandbox waiting for you to build a castle in it. It might take
|
||||||
some getting used to, but it will definitely pay off.
|
some getting used to, but it will definitely pay off.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Anyway, that's just my opinion. In reality you can pick any distro you like. It
|
||||||
|
does not really matter that much. Just keep in mind that some distro's ship
|
||||||
|
newer kernels than others, and that's really quite important as we will learn in
|
||||||
|
the next paragraph.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Kernel
|
## Kernel
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
You need to run at least kernel 6.1, because of the `net.ipv4.tcp_shrink_window`
|
You need to run at least kernel 6.1, because of the `net.ipv4.tcp_shrink_window`
|
||||||
@@ -449,8 +529,8 @@ sysctl. But generally, **newer is better**. There are dozens of engineers from
|
|||||||
Google, Cloudflare and Meta tinkering away at the Linux network stack every day.
|
Google, Cloudflare and Meta tinkering away at the Linux network stack every day.
|
||||||
It gets better with every release, really, the pace is staggering.
|
It gets better with every release, really, the pace is staggering.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
But doesn't Debian ship really old kernel packages? (you might ask) Yes...
|
But doesn't Debian ship quite old kernel packages? (you might ask) Yes... kinda.
|
||||||
kinda. By using [this guide](https://wiki.debian.org/HowToUpgradeKernel) you can
|
By using [this guide](https://wiki.debian.org/HowToUpgradeKernel) you can
|
||||||
upgrade your kernel version to the `testing` or even the `experimental` branch
|
upgrade your kernel version to the `testing` or even the `experimental` branch
|
||||||
while keeping the rest of the OS the same.
|
while keeping the rest of the OS the same.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@@ -465,3 +545,24 @@ blog](https://www.phoronix.com/linux/Linux+Networking) for new kernel features.
|
|||||||
Pretty much every kernel version that comes out boasts about huge network
|
Pretty much every kernel version that comes out boasts about huge network
|
||||||
performance wins. I'm personally waiting for Kernel 6.8 to come out. They are
|
performance wins. I'm personally waiting for Kernel 6.8 to come out. They are
|
||||||
promising a 40% TCP performance boost. Crazy!
|
promising a 40% TCP performance boost. Crazy!
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## That's all, folks!
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I hope this guide was useful to you. I wish I had something like this when I
|
||||||
|
started out. I could have quite literally saved me months of time. Then again,
|
||||||
|
chasing 100 Gigabit is one of the most educative challenges I have ever faced. I
|
||||||
|
have learned so much about Linux's structure, kernel performance profiling, CPU
|
||||||
|
architecture, the PCIe bus and tons of other things that I would never have
|
||||||
|
known if I did not go down this rabbit hole. And I have a feeling the journey is
|
||||||
|
not over. I will always have this urge to get the absolute most out of my
|
||||||
|
servers. I'm paying for the whole CPU and I'm going to use the whole CPU after
|
||||||
|
all.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Anyway, check out [Pixeldrain](/) if you like, it's the fastest way to transfer
|
||||||
|
files across the web. And I'm working on a [cloud storage](/filesystem) offering
|
||||||
|
as well. It has built in rclone and FTPS support. Pixeldrain also has a built in
|
||||||
|
[speedtest](/speedtest) which you can use to see the fruits of my labour.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Follow me on [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/@fornax),
|
||||||
|
[Twitter](https://twitter.com/Fornax96), join our
|
||||||
|
[Discord](https://discord.gg/pixeldrain), et cetera et cetera
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user