Re: Re : Layer4 and Layer7 TPS

Hello.

I said in my previous email that this kind of results are "a bunch of bullshit". In fact the point that makes me angry is the "race for performance" all vendors are currently running :)

I could find this also http://deliver.citrix.com/go/citrix/TollyReport another performance report where citrix beats F5 (the opposite of the one you get :) )


All products from the leaders on the market scale well and will continue to scale. Just take a look to this (just an example, I'm not a brocade employee) http://www.brocade.com/products-solutions/products/ethernet-switches-routers/application-delivery/product-details/serveriron-adx-series/specifications.page

Most vendors now rely on the same architecture :

- Build a single L4-L7 Processing Unit (multi core, multi cpu, multi fpga, multi blahblah...)
- Add 8, 16 , 32 or 64 PUs in your box
- Use a hash function to distribute the flows accross all the processing units to distribute the load.

Your product will scale indefinitely, and if you use a crossbar to connect all the elements, your architecture can be non blocking.

According to this paradigm, most vendors now support multi-10GE effective throughput (just look to the link I sent, Brocade claims to support 70GE sustained rate) with a lot of hundreds of thousands TPS.

Just to check the values claimed by the vendor you test, you can rent some Avalanche and Reflector stuff from Spirent communications with your configuration.

When I have some requests from customers, usually the vendor is not chosen based on the claimed performance or features but on other points : management, reporting, pricing, ease of maintenance...

Surya

--- En date de : Ven 20.11.09, ADC expert <[email protected]> a écrit :

De: ADC expert <[email protected]>
Objet: Re: [load balancing] Re : Layer4 and Layer7 TPS
À: "Load Balancing Mailing List" <[email protected]>
Date: Vendredi 20 Novembre 2009, 6h56

@Kenneth, I am not F5 employee.
I am validating the existing ADC products for L4-L7 TPS. I really appreciate F5 publishing their results. 
Coming to the discussion, I believe and agree that hardware plays its role to show up better performance. The recent press release from Radware claims 340K TPS for its Alteon on their On demand hardware. Compared to what Alteon 3408 used to have, its a tremendous improvement. That proves software plays its role in performance.  At the same time, it confuses when I see performance results of one ADC vendor to be L7 -300K TPS that claims to have hardware excellence.

Thanks,

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Kenneth Salchow <[email protected]> wrote:














While I might not be quite so exuberant in my response, I will suggest
the Surya has a couple valid points.

 

First, however, let me say that, to the best of my knowledge,
that post was NOT made by an F5 employee.  If it is discovered that it was, it
was inappropriate and it will be rectified.  IF, however, it truly is simply one
of our customers who found some value in our testing, I’m happy to see
their excitement and enthusiasm.  I, personally, believe we do a pretty fair
job of presenting the facts; we publish the results regardless of whether we
come out on top or not and we provide complete transparency as to the
configurations of all devices, testing equipment and methodology.  Given the
report, the time and the equipment, anyone should be able to produce the same
results.  I truly believe it is as unbiased as it can be.

 

That being said, I agree with Surya the no matter how unbiased a
performance report may or may not be, the true test is how the device performs
in YOUR environment with YOUR applications and YOUR business processes.  As
they say, the proof of the pudding is in the tasting; make sure you get a true
taste.  If possible, a PoC is something we suggest all our prospective
customers do.  Anyone who has been a part of this list for any time knows that
I am a strong proponent of that philosophy.  In the end, that’s all that
matters.

 

I wish the ADC Expert good luck (Bon Chance, I believe?) in
their search for the best product for their needs.  If you have any specific
questions, I’m sure everyone in the list will be happy to give their
perspective and input.

 

 

 


 
  
  KJ (Ken) Salchow, Jr. | Manager, Technical
  Marketing
  
 
 
  
  D 651.423.1133
  
  
  M 612.868.1258
  
  
  P 206.272.5555
  
  
  F 206.272.5555
  
  
  www.f5.com

  
 


 

 



From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Surya ARBY

Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:43 PM

To: Load Balancing Mailing List

Subject: [load balancing] Re : Layer4 and Layer7 TPS



 


 
  
  Hello.

  

  To me this kind of "performance reports" or "competitive
  analysis" are just a bunch of bullshit.

  

  You'll find a lot of other papers on Citrix / Cisco / any vendor web site
  with a lot of case studies stating they are the best vendor with the best
  appliance and that the end customer is the happiest customer in the world
  with his solution :)

  

  Make a POC and setup your own load testing :)

  

  The real L4/L7 performance in a specific configuration varies according to
  the internal architecture of the product you test. Cisco ACE module
  distributes the load between two NPs according to the result of a hash
  function to process load balanced flows, Ace appliance relies on a single
  Cavium Octeon chipset for the data plane, Citrix uses a purely software based
  appliance, F5 and Foundry use another architectures (barrel processors in
  foundry boxes are distributed like NPs in cisco ace module)...

  

  When you perform load testing it's very important to understand how the box
  you test really works internally, because results (and comparison) will
  change with the choosen scenario that's why the "performance
  report" you mention is necessarily biaised :)

  

  regards,

  

  Surya

  

  --- En date de : Jeu 19.11.09, ADC expert <[email protected]>
  a écrit :
  

  De: ADC expert <[email protected]>

  Objet: [load balancing] Layer4 and Layer7 TPS

  À: [email protected]

  Date: Jeudi 19 Novembre 2009, 19h09
  
  Hi Experts,

     I was looking for a  ADC device that can give best L4 and
  L7 TPS. After considerable search, I got few things to get clarified before
  selecting the best.

     F5 has extensive performance report in its website.

     http://www.f5.com/pdf/reports/f5-performance-report.pdf

     I wonder why other vendors did not report in such detail. Even
  if, there is  no free access.

     I appreciate if some one sends me across cisco, citrix and other
  vendors performance details.

  

    -Thanks.

      
  
  

  -----La pièce jointe associée suit-----
  
  _______________________________________________

  lb-l mailing list

  [email protected]

  http://vegan.net/mailman/listinfo/lb-l

  Searchable Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive

  http://lbdigest.com Load
  Balancing Digest

  http://lbwiki.com Load
  Balancing Wiki
  
  
 


 







_______________________________________________

lb-l mailing list

[email protected]

http://vegan.net/mailman/listinfo/lb-l

Searchable Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive

http://lbdigest.com Load Balancing Digest

http://lbwiki.com Load Balancing Wiki





-----La pièce jointe associée suit-----

_______________________________________________
lb-l mailing list
[email protected]
http://vegan.net/mailman/listinfo/lb-l
Searchable Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
http://lbdigest.com Load Balancing Digest
http://lbwiki.com Load Balancing Wiki

_______________________________________________
lb-l mailing list
[email protected]
http://vegan.net/mailman/listinfo/lb-l
Searchable Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
http://lbdigest.com Load Balancing Digest
http://lbwiki.com Load Balancing Wiki