<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>10 Gigabit Ethernet is a LIE! (Updated twice)</title>
		<description>Discuss 10 Gigabit Ethernet is a LIE! (Updated twice)</description>
		<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:22:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.backupcentral.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/133/10.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>W. Curtis Preston says:</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-1160</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@David Peterson FWIW, real SSD throughput is far from what you're quoting. This test http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/ssd-charts-2010/Fresh-state-Throughput-Read-Average,2311.html shows that the real throughput of SSDs is less than half of that number. And, yes, I know you have to be able to push it. Finally, please note that this article was written almost three years ago. Things have changed a bit since then. ;)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>W. Curtis Preston</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 04:19:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-1160</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Peterson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-1159</link>
			<description><![CDATA[10GbE is 1280 MB/s but you have to have drives that can saturate it, if you want to use the full 10GbE connection. It's not a lie, that its capable of 1280 MB/s SSD's are only capable of 500 MB/s at this point and that saturates 1 GbE which is only capable of 128 MB/s Sounds like someones hasn't raided high speed drives to be able to utilize the bandwidth of 10GbE.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Peterson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Feb 2011 14:03:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-1159</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>10GbE is not a lie</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-417</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I know many people getting 900MB/s through 10gig. A better title would be "I can't get 10GbE to go anywhere near rated speed".]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Will</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:30:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-417</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>grammar says:</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-95</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Link aggregation and "10 GbE" are not, not, not the same thing. I'm surprised at your performance on T2000s, though. That's really crappy overuse of the CPU. Is it really that bad? A shame. I thought those things were shiny the last time I played with them, but I was much more interested in their performance to tape and overall manageability (both of which are outstanding) than I was in their network performance. In related "who needs an expensive 10 GbE card, we've got 802.3ad", I've been quite pleased with both the ease of configuration (a dream, as compared with Solaris 10's hackery) and performance of HP-UX's solution. It just works when you tell it to, it does aggregation and/or failover across N physical connections, and (like Sun's kit) plays nicely with however you'd like to set up your switches (including "totally ignorant, deal with the arp your own damn self").]]></description>
			<dc:creator>grammar</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:03:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-95</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>aprice</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-94</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I work with a company called Neterion who leads the market in 10GbE technology. We have many customers who achieve full line rate. I would love to send you some papers with real life applications. Just shoot me an e-mail. adam.price@neterion.com www.neterion.com]]></description>
			<dc:creator>jfragoso</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-94</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>PaulT says:</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-93</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In most cases in the past, I'd wholly agree. However, recent experience has shown link aggregation on Solaris 10 can achieve 3.45GB/s at ~20% cpu utilisation on T2000 servers. This configuration is aggregating 4 * onboard gigabit interfaces without using jumbo frames. Achieving these kind of figures on previous Solaris versions typically hasn't been possible. With a fair amount of network tweaking, gigabit links can be made to perform near wire speed but any requirement over 1GB haven't delivered. Moving forward, I'd anticipate the Niagara 2 based servers with 2 * 10Ge to deliver similarly impressive throughput results. If anyone's received their Niagara 2 servers yet, I'd be interested to see the results...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>PaulT</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2007 01:20:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/133-10-gbe-lie.html#comment-93</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

