nanog mailing list archives
Re: DPDK and energy efficiency
From: Tom Hill <tom () ninjabadger net>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 16:09:04 +0000
On 05/03/2021 00:26, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
A great deal of this discussion could be resolved by the use of a $20 in-line 120VAC watt meter [1] plugged into something as simple as a $500 1U server with some of the DPDK-enabled network cards connected to its PCI-E bus, running DANOS.
I'm fairly sure Etienne-Victor's email made specific reference to wattage measurements in both [2] and [3]. It would be fair to assume that the authors of those (IEEE) papers understood that you could measure wattage at the wall socket, before embarking on a paper regarding power efficiency.
Characterizing the idle load, average usage load, and absolute maximum wattage load of an x86-64 platform is excessively difficult or complicated.
It really isn't, particularly when the high figure is 400% of the low figure. You don't need milliwatt precision to see that your CPU is wasting power while not actually forwarding any packets. -- Tom
Current thread:
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Etienne-Victor Depasquale (Mar 04)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Eric Kuhnke (Mar 04)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Tom Hill (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Eric Kuhnke (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Tom Hill (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Tom Hill (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Etienne-Victor Depasquale (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Brian Knight via NANOG (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Eric Kuhnke (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Brian Knight via NANOG (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Eric Kuhnke (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Etienne-Victor Depasquale (Mar 05)
- Re: DPDK and energy efficiency Eric Kuhnke (Mar 04)