RE: Virtual Ethernet - Part II

Well, if you think about it, 21577 Kbytes/sec is roughly equivalent to 169 Mbits/sec, meaning that your transfers through the network were using less than 10% of your 2Gb/sec network. Years ago, with 10Mbit/sec and 100Mbit/sec network speeds, clearly the bottleneck was the network. However, with your 2Gb/sec connections, your bottleneck is now your system (more specifically, your disk).

So, bottom line (and I don't know much about VLAN optimization), I would say that this is as good as it gets.

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ingvaldson, Scott
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:00 AM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Virtual Ethernet - Part II

OK, the VLAN appears to be working as designed but I still have some
questions.

The speed of our Anynet transfers has increased by a factor 4 - 8.
Transfers that were taking 3 - 4 hours now complete in 30 - 45 minutes.
As long as I do them one at a time. If I do more than one at a time
they slow considerably.

FTP transfers take the same amount of time using the VLAN as they did
running over the network. Reported transfer rates are in the range of
12000 - 14000 KB/sec. Strangely enough, I was able to hit 21577 KB/sec.
on a 2 GB transfer, not using the VLAN, doing an FTP to a Network
Server!

An iNav monitor shows the VLAN utilization to be 8 - 10% when doing FTP
and up to 20% for SAVRSTxxx commands. But if I run two simultaneous
SAVRSTxxx transfers the utilization drops to 15%, even if the transfers
are initiated from different LPARs.

Is there some tuning that can be done to the VLAN or is this as good as
it gets?

Regards,

Scott Ingvaldson
Senior IBM Support Specialist
Fiserv Midwest