Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 670959
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 14, 20262026-05-14T00:19:15+00:00 2026-05-14T00:19:15+00:00

We make heavy use of multicasting messaging across many Linux servers on a LAN.

  • 0

We make heavy use of multicasting messaging across many Linux servers on a LAN. We are seeing a lot of delays. We basically send an enormous number of small packages. We are more concerned with latency than throughput. The machines are all modern, multi-core (at least four, generally eight, 16 if you count hyperthreading) machines, always with a load of 2.0 or less, usually with a load less than 1.0. The networking hardware is also under 50% capacity.

The delays we see look like queueing delays: the packets will quickly start increasing in latency, until it looks like they jam up, then return back to normal.

The messaging structure is basically this: in the “sending thread”, pull messages from a queue, add a timestamp (using gettimeofday()), then call send(). The receiving program receives the message, timestamps the receive time, and pushes it in a queue. In a separate thread, the queue is processed, analyzing the difference between sending and receiving timestamps. (Note that our internal queues are not part of the problem, since the timestamps are added outside of our internal queuing.)

We don’t really know where to start looking for an answer to this problem. We’re not familiar with Linux internals. Our suspicion is that the kernel is queuing or buffering the packets, either on the send side or the receive side (or both). But we don’t know how to track this down and trace it.

For what it’s worth, we’re using CentOS 4.x (RHEL kernel 2.6.9).

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-14T00:19:16+00:00Added an answer on May 14, 2026 at 12:19 am

    Packets can queue up in the send and receive side kernel, the NIC and the networking infrastructure. You will find a plethora of items you can test and tweak.

    For the NIC you can usually find interrupt coalescing parameters – how long the NIC will wait before notifying the kernel or sending to the wire whilst waiting to batch packets.

    For Linux you have the send and receive “buffers”, the larger they are the more likely you are to experience higher latency as packets get handled in batched operations.

    For the architecture and Linux version you have to be aware of how expensive context switches are and whether there are locks or pre-emptive scheduling enabled. Consider minimizing the number of applications running, using process affinity to lock processes to particular cores.

    Don’t forget timing, the Linux kernel version you are using has pretty terrible accuracy on the gettimeofday() clock (2-4ms) and is quite an expensive call. Consider using alternatives such as reading from the core TSC or an external HPET device.

    Diagram from Intel:
    alt text http://www.theinquirer.net/IMG/142/96142/latency-580×358.png?1272514422

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I am new to SVN and make heavy use of the externals property. I
I often hear complaints that programming languages that make heavy use of symbols for
Coming from the MS SQL world, I tend to make heavy use of stored
In my java program I make heavy use of Suns implmentation of the Rhino
We have a couple of very very slow JUnit tests that make heavy use
We make heavy use of page caching, and sometimes pages get cached with a
I am currently writing a project where I make a heavy use of ListT
In $VCS I make heavy use of $VCS diff -c $N to see only
I have some programs which make heavy use of libraries with enumerations of error
I'm writing a python application that will make heavy use of a graph data

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.