Page tree

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


  1. Performance degradation due to Cross-NUMA Node instantiation of NIC, vSwitch, and VNF can vary from 50-60% for lower size packets (64, 128, 256) to under 0-20% for higher packet sizes ( > 256 bytes)
  2. The worst performance was observed with PVP setup and scenarios where all PMD cores and NICs are in same NUMA Node, but VNF cores are shared across NUMA Nodes. Hence, VNF cores are best allocated within the same NUMA Node. If the VIM prevents VNF instantiation across multiple NUMA Nodes then, this issue is effectively avoided. However, at the time of this testing, K8s is believed to be NUMA Node agnostic when placing Pods in its normal mode, or when using DPDK and SR/IOV, and makes this testing more relevant until this the situation changes.
  3. Any variations in CPU assignments under P2P setups has no effect on performance for packet sizes above 128 bytes. However, V2V setups show performance differences for larger packet sizes of 512 and 1024 bytes.
  4. Continuous traffic-tests and RFC2544 Throughput using Binary Search with Loss-Verification provides more consistent results across multiple-runs. Hence, these methods should be preferred over legacy RFC2544 methods using Binary search or Linear search algorithms.
  5. A single NUMA Node serving multiple interfaces is worse than Cross-NUMA Node performance degradation. Hence, it is better to avoid such configurations. For example, if both the physical NICs are assigned to NUMA-Node id 0 (with core ids 0-21), then the configuration-a below will lead to poorer performance than configuration-b