RTX 與 Windows 以太網(wǎng)性能分析

trueleven

RTX 下使用普通網(wǎng)卡即可實現(xiàn)實時以太網(wǎng)的性能。作者對 RTX 與 Windows 下以太網(wǎng)性能進(jìn)行了對比測試來驗證該觀點。

1. 測試環(huán)境
       Windows XP 操作系統(tǒng), RTX 使用Dedicated 模式, 單獨占用一顆 CPU 核, 硬件使用 Core i7, 4 核8 線程, 2.8GHz 主頻, 4GB 內(nèi)存, 兩塊 Intel 82545GM 千兆網(wǎng)卡點對點互聯(lián)。

2. 測試方法
       RTX 環(huán)境下, 測試方法為兩臺機(jī)器分別運行RT Client 和 RT Server 兩個 RTSS 應(yīng)用程序, RT Client 發(fā)送數(shù)據(jù)包到 RT Server, RT Server 收到數(shù)據(jù)包之后發(fā)送回 RT Client。使用 TCP/IP & UDP 協(xié)議, 選擇不同的包長度, 每次發(fā)送500 個數(shù)據(jù)包, 重復(fù) 20 次Windows 環(huán)境下, 兩臺機(jī)器分別運行 Client 和 Server 兩個應(yīng)用程序, Client 發(fā)送數(shù)據(jù)包到 Server, Server 收到數(shù)據(jù)包之后發(fā)送回 Client。使用 TCP/IP & UDP 協(xié)議, 選擇不同的包長度, 每次發(fā)送500 個數(shù)據(jù)包, 重復(fù) 20 次。

3. 測試結(jié)果

RTX 環(huán)境, TCP/IP 協(xié)議測試結(jié)果	Windows 環(huán)境, TCP/IP 協(xié)議測試結(jié)果
Packet Size = 1 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 35 us Maximum Time = 54 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	--
Packet Size = 16 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 36 us Maximum Time = 55 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 16 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 55 us Maximum Time = 199 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 32 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 37 us Maximum Time = 54 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 32 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 58 us Maximum Time = 196 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 64 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 39 us Maximum Time = 51 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 64 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 58 us Maximum Time = 3400 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 128 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 42 us Maximum Time = 59 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 128 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 55 us Maximum Time = 166 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 256 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 50 us Maximum Time = 71 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 256 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 79 us Maximum Time = 653 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 512 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 64 us Maximum Time = 92 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 512 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 122 us Maximum Time = 495 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 1024 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 92 us Maximum Time = 111 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 1024 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 212 us Maximum Time = 716 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 1462 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 117 us Maximum Time = 633 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	--
Packet Size = 2048 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 124 us Maximum Time = 632 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 2048 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 165 us Maximum Time = 709 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 4096 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 188 us Maximum Time = 695 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 4096 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 232 us Maximum Time = 565 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 8192 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 289 us Maximum Time = 1083 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 8192 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 348 us Maximum Time = 946 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0
Packet Size = 65535 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 1643 us Maximum Time = 2707 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0	Packet Size = 65535 bytes Connections = 1 Messages / Connection = 10000 Minimum Time = 2244 us Maximum Time = 2591 us Errors = 0 Lost Packets = 0

4 測試數(shù)據(jù)分析
       使用 TCP/IP 協(xié)議, 當(dāng)傳輸?shù)臄?shù)據(jù)包長度低于1460 上限時, RTX 下數(shù)據(jù)包傳輸?shù)膶崟r性明顯優(yōu)于 Windows 。當(dāng)傳輸數(shù)據(jù)包長度超過 1460 上限的大包時, RTX 在應(yīng)用層分包, Windows 下在 IP 層自動分包。由于 TCP 協(xié)議數(shù)據(jù)傳輸?shù)目煽啃砸��? RTX 下大數(shù)據(jù)包需要接收多次數(shù)據(jù)包 ACK 報文, RTX 下數(shù)據(jù)包傳輸?shù)膶崟r性與 Windows 相當(dāng)。使用 UDP 協(xié)議傳輸時, 由于 UDP 協(xié)議不需要數(shù)據(jù)包ACK 報文, RTX 實時性得以體現(xiàn), RTX 下數(shù)據(jù)包傳輸?shù)膶崟r性明顯優(yōu)于 Windows 。

5 結(jié)論
1）使用 TCP/IP 協(xié)議, 相比于 Windows, RTX 在傳輸小包(數(shù)據(jù)包長度低于 1460) 時有明顯的實時性。
2）使用 UDP 協(xié)議, 相比于 Windows, RTX 在數(shù)據(jù)包傳輸時有明顯的實時性。