Network packet size on sql server connection string to improve throughputImplementing jumbo frames on one interface and not the otherLink Aggregation And Jumbo Frames configured but not workingJumbo frames with wireless clientMAX Connection Pool Setting SQL Server 2008Server 2012, Jumbo Frames - should I expect problems?Issue with Netgear GS108T Managed Switch and Jumbo FramesFull MTU not utilized with jumbo frames enabledTCP packet loss against SQL-serverRX errors when using jumbo packetsTrouble enabling Jumbo Frames?
Does a card have a keyword if it has the same effect as said keyword?
Did we get closer to another plane than we were supposed to, or was the pilot just protecting our delicate sensibilities?
What does this colon mean? It is not labeling, it is not ternary operator
Independent, post-Brexit Scotland - would there be a hard border with England?
Pressure inside an infinite ocean?
I'm in your subnets, golfing your code
Would glacier 'trees' be plausible?
If stationary points and minima are equivalent, then the function is convex?
Will 700 more planes a day fly because of the Heathrow expansion?
Can there be a single technologically advanced nation, in a continent full of non-technologically advanced nations?
How does this change to the opportunity attack rule impact combat?
What happens if you dump antimatter into a black hole?
Why do money exchangers give different rates to different bills?
What is the most remote airport from the center of the city it supposedly serves?
What was the design of the Macintosh II's MMU replacement?
Out of scope work duties and resignation
Manager is threatening to grade me poorly if I don't complete the project
Missing Piece of Pie - Can you find it?
How was the quadratic formula created?
Why doesn't WotC use established keywords on all new cards?
What matters more when it comes to book covers? Is it ‘professional quality’ or relevancy?
How can I support myself financially as a 17 year old with a loan?
How to model the curly cable part of the phone
Why wasn't the Night King naked in S08E03?
Network packet size on sql server connection string to improve throughput
Implementing jumbo frames on one interface and not the otherLink Aggregation And Jumbo Frames configured but not workingJumbo frames with wireless clientMAX Connection Pool Setting SQL Server 2008Server 2012, Jumbo Frames - should I expect problems?Issue with Netgear GS108T Managed Switch and Jumbo FramesFull MTU not utilized with jumbo frames enabledTCP packet loss against SQL-serverRX errors when using jumbo packetsTrouble enabling Jumbo Frames?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
We have a dataload job that moves a relatively large amount of data across the network between two sql servers. the servers are on the same subnet and there is only a switch between them. the data consists of several large varchar fields plus an xml field.
In order to increase throughput. I have tried changing the network packet size from the default 4096 to 32627 on the connection string; However it doesn't seem to be helping performance. I suspect the issue is that although we a running gig ethernet, "jumbo frames" are not enabled.
To confirm this, I tried two ping tests:
ping -l 1400 -f pdbsql01dul
Works
ping -l 4096 -f pdbsql01dul
Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
as you can see the largest packet size appears to be around 1400
My question is, if Jumbo frames are ~8096, is there any benefit of setting the network packet size larger than that?
Does this change if the connection is local to the server in question?
sql-server connection jumboframes
asked Jul 31 '09 at 19:17
Jason HornerJason Horner
4922411
add a comment |
We have a dataload job that moves a relatively large amount of data across the network between two sql servers. the servers are on the same subnet and there is only a switch between them. the data consists of several large varchar fields plus an xml field.
In order to increase throughput. I have tried changing the network packet size from the default 4096 to 32627 on the connection string; However it doesn't seem to be helping performance. I suspect the issue is that although we a running gig ethernet, "jumbo frames" are not enabled.
To confirm this, I tried two ping tests:
ping -l 1400 -f pdbsql01dul
Works
ping -l 4096 -f pdbsql01dul
Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
as you can see the largest packet size appears to be around 1400
My question is, if Jumbo frames are ~8096, is there any benefit of setting the network packet size larger than that?
Does this change if the connection is local to the server in question?
sql-server connection jumboframes
asked Jul 31 '09 at 19:17
Jason HornerJason Horner
4922411
add a comment |
We have a dataload job that moves a relatively large amount of data across the network between two sql servers. the servers are on the same subnet and there is only a switch between them. the data consists of several large varchar fields plus an xml field.
In order to increase throughput. I have tried changing the network packet size from the default 4096 to 32627 on the connection string; However it doesn't seem to be helping performance. I suspect the issue is that although we a running gig ethernet, "jumbo frames" are not enabled.
To confirm this, I tried two ping tests:
ping -l 1400 -f pdbsql01dul
Works
ping -l 4096 -f pdbsql01dul
Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
as you can see the largest packet size appears to be around 1400
My question is, if Jumbo frames are ~8096, is there any benefit of setting the network packet size larger than that?
Does this change if the connection is local to the server in question?
sql-server connection jumboframes
asked Jul 31 '09 at 19:17
Jason HornerJason Horner
4922411
We have a dataload job that moves a relatively large amount of data across the network between two sql servers. the servers are on the same subnet and there is only a switch between them. the data consists of several large varchar fields plus an xml field.
In order to increase throughput. I have tried changing the network packet size from the default 4096 to 32627 on the connection string; However it doesn't seem to be helping performance. I suspect the issue is that although we a running gig ethernet, "jumbo frames" are not enabled.
To confirm this, I tried two ping tests:
ping -l 1400 -f pdbsql01dul
Works
ping -l 4096 -f pdbsql01dul
Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
as you can see the largest packet size appears to be around 1400
My question is, if Jumbo frames are ~8096, is there any benefit of setting the network packet size larger than that?
Does this change if the connection is local to the server in question?
sql-server connection jumboframes
sql-server connection jumboframes
asked Jul 31 '09 at 19:17
Jason HornerJason Horner
4922411
asked Jul 31 '09 at 19:17
Jason HornerJason Horner
4922411
asked Jul 31 '09 at 19:17
Jason HornerJason Horner
4922411
asked Jul 31 '09 at 19:17
Jason HornerJason Horner
4922411
asked Jul 31 '09 at 19:17
Jason HornerJason Horner
4922411
4922411
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
What needs to happen is that the MTU setting on the ethernet network needs to be increased from 1500 to something north of 4096. These settings are typically set on the Driver settings page. For good networking you really want all devices (including all ethernet switches) on the same ethernet to have the same MTU setting.
(source: sysadmin1138.net)
That's where you'd change it on one of my servers.
Can it help? It certainly can. Less packet fragmentation means less work on the TCP stack to reassemble the traffic stream. It may not be orders of magnitude, but it could help.
Connections local to the server use, I believe, pipes rather than TCP connections and are probably unaffected by this change.
edited Apr 24 at 11:24
Glorfindel
4291616
answered Jul 31 '09 at 19:57
sysadmin1138♦sysadmin1138
117k17146282
3
You'll probably need to enable Jumbo Frames on the network switch as well.
– mrdenny
Jul 31 '09 at 20:08
add a comment |
You can try, but I doubt it will help much. TDS as a protocol was never designed for high troughput. If you want to move data between two SQL server instances you may consider using Service Broker instead, its network stack is much more oriented toward high troughput than the TDS one. This is why Mirroring choose the SSB network stack to communicate with the standby mirror servers. Besides the data movement semantics of SSB are much better than linked servers and usually better than custom client apps.
answered Aug 1 '09 at 5:25
Remus RusanuRemus Rusanu
7,9081422
add a comment |
I can't comment on tcp, frames etc, but I've only set SQL Sever network packet size once, ever, for some vile app that still needed SQL 6.5 client tools.
It's one of those "don't do it" settings.
answered Jul 31 '09 at 20:22
gbngbn
5,74111321
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f48667%2fnetwork-packet-size-on-sql-server-connection-string-to-improve-throughput%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
What needs to happen is that the MTU setting on the ethernet network needs to be increased from 1500 to something north of 4096. These settings are typically set on the Driver settings page. For good networking you really want all devices (including all ethernet switches) on the same ethernet to have the same MTU setting.
(source: sysadmin1138.net)
That's where you'd change it on one of my servers.
Can it help? It certainly can. Less packet fragmentation means less work on the TCP stack to reassemble the traffic stream. It may not be orders of magnitude, but it could help.
Connections local to the server use, I believe, pipes rather than TCP connections and are probably unaffected by this change.
edited Apr 24 at 11:24
Glorfindel
4291616
answered Jul 31 '09 at 19:57
sysadmin1138♦sysadmin1138
117k17146282
3
You'll probably need to enable Jumbo Frames on the network switch as well.
– mrdenny
Jul 31 '09 at 20:08
add a comment |
What needs to happen is that the MTU setting on the ethernet network needs to be increased from 1500 to something north of 4096. These settings are typically set on the Driver settings page. For good networking you really want all devices (including all ethernet switches) on the same ethernet to have the same MTU setting.
(source: sysadmin1138.net)
That's where you'd change it on one of my servers.
Can it help? It certainly can. Less packet fragmentation means less work on the TCP stack to reassemble the traffic stream. It may not be orders of magnitude, but it could help.
Connections local to the server use, I believe, pipes rather than TCP connections and are probably unaffected by this change.
edited Apr 24 at 11:24
Glorfindel
4291616
answered Jul 31 '09 at 19:57
sysadmin1138♦sysadmin1138
117k17146282
3
You'll probably need to enable Jumbo Frames on the network switch as well.
– mrdenny
Jul 31 '09 at 20:08
add a comment |
What needs to happen is that the MTU setting on the ethernet network needs to be increased from 1500 to something north of 4096. These settings are typically set on the Driver settings page. For good networking you really want all devices (including all ethernet switches) on the same ethernet to have the same MTU setting.
(source: sysadmin1138.net)
That's where you'd change it on one of my servers.
Can it help? It certainly can. Less packet fragmentation means less work on the TCP stack to reassemble the traffic stream. It may not be orders of magnitude, but it could help.
Connections local to the server use, I believe, pipes rather than TCP connections and are probably unaffected by this change.
edited Apr 24 at 11:24
Glorfindel
4291616
answered Jul 31 '09 at 19:57
sysadmin1138♦sysadmin1138
117k17146282
What needs to happen is that the MTU setting on the ethernet network needs to be increased from 1500 to something north of 4096. These settings are typically set on the Driver settings page. For good networking you really want all devices (including all ethernet switches) on the same ethernet to have the same MTU setting.
(source: sysadmin1138.net)
That's where you'd change it on one of my servers.
Can it help? It certainly can. Less packet fragmentation means less work on the TCP stack to reassemble the traffic stream. It may not be orders of magnitude, but it could help.
Connections local to the server use, I believe, pipes rather than TCP connections and are probably unaffected by this change.
edited Apr 24 at 11:24
Glorfindel
4291616
answered Jul 31 '09 at 19:57
sysadmin1138♦sysadmin1138
117k17146282
edited Apr 24 at 11:24
Glorfindel
4291616
edited Apr 24 at 11:24
Glorfindel
4291616
edited Apr 24 at 11:24
Glorfindel
4291616
4291616
answered Jul 31 '09 at 19:57
sysadmin1138♦sysadmin1138
117k17146282
answered Jul 31 '09 at 19:57
sysadmin1138♦sysadmin1138
117k17146282
answered Jul 31 '09 at 19:57
sysadmin1138♦sysadmin1138
117k17146282
117k17146282
3
You'll probably need to enable Jumbo Frames on the network switch as well.
– mrdenny
Jul 31 '09 at 20:08
add a comment |
3
You'll probably need to enable Jumbo Frames on the network switch as well.
– mrdenny
Jul 31 '09 at 20:08
3
3
You'll probably need to enable Jumbo Frames on the network switch as well.
– mrdenny
Jul 31 '09 at 20:08
You'll probably need to enable Jumbo Frames on the network switch as well.
– mrdenny
Jul 31 '09 at 20:08
add a comment |
You can try, but I doubt it will help much. TDS as a protocol was never designed for high troughput. If you want to move data between two SQL server instances you may consider using Service Broker instead, its network stack is much more oriented toward high troughput than the TDS one. This is why Mirroring choose the SSB network stack to communicate with the standby mirror servers. Besides the data movement semantics of SSB are much better than linked servers and usually better than custom client apps.
answered Aug 1 '09 at 5:25
Remus RusanuRemus Rusanu
7,9081422
add a comment |
You can try, but I doubt it will help much. TDS as a protocol was never designed for high troughput. If you want to move data between two SQL server instances you may consider using Service Broker instead, its network stack is much more oriented toward high troughput than the TDS one. This is why Mirroring choose the SSB network stack to communicate with the standby mirror servers. Besides the data movement semantics of SSB are much better than linked servers and usually better than custom client apps.
answered Aug 1 '09 at 5:25
Remus RusanuRemus Rusanu
7,9081422
add a comment |
You can try, but I doubt it will help much. TDS as a protocol was never designed for high troughput. If you want to move data between two SQL server instances you may consider using Service Broker instead, its network stack is much more oriented toward high troughput than the TDS one. This is why Mirroring choose the SSB network stack to communicate with the standby mirror servers. Besides the data movement semantics of SSB are much better than linked servers and usually better than custom client apps.
answered Aug 1 '09 at 5:25
Remus RusanuRemus Rusanu
7,9081422
You can try, but I doubt it will help much. TDS as a protocol was never designed for high troughput. If you want to move data between two SQL server instances you may consider using Service Broker instead, its network stack is much more oriented toward high troughput than the TDS one. This is why Mirroring choose the SSB network stack to communicate with the standby mirror servers. Besides the data movement semantics of SSB are much better than linked servers and usually better than custom client apps.
answered Aug 1 '09 at 5:25
Remus RusanuRemus Rusanu
7,9081422
answered Aug 1 '09 at 5:25
Remus RusanuRemus Rusanu
7,9081422
answered Aug 1 '09 at 5:25
Remus RusanuRemus Rusanu
7,9081422
answered Aug 1 '09 at 5:25
Remus RusanuRemus Rusanu
7,9081422
7,9081422
add a comment |
add a comment |
I can't comment on tcp, frames etc, but I've only set SQL Sever network packet size once, ever, for some vile app that still needed SQL 6.5 client tools.
It's one of those "don't do it" settings.
answered Jul 31 '09 at 20:22
gbngbn
5,74111321
add a comment |
I can't comment on tcp, frames etc, but I've only set SQL Sever network packet size once, ever, for some vile app that still needed SQL 6.5 client tools.
It's one of those "don't do it" settings.
answered Jul 31 '09 at 20:22
gbngbn
5,74111321
add a comment |
I can't comment on tcp, frames etc, but I've only set SQL Sever network packet size once, ever, for some vile app that still needed SQL 6.5 client tools.
It's one of those "don't do it" settings.
answered Jul 31 '09 at 20:22
gbngbn
5,74111321
I can't comment on tcp, frames etc, but I've only set SQL Sever network packet size once, ever, for some vile app that still needed SQL 6.5 client tools.
It's one of those "don't do it" settings.
answered Jul 31 '09 at 20:22
gbngbn
5,74111321
answered Jul 31 '09 at 20:22
gbngbn
5,74111321
answered Jul 31 '09 at 20:22
gbngbn
5,74111321
answered Jul 31 '09 at 20:22
gbngbn
5,74111321
5,74111321
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f48667%2fnetwork-packet-size-on-sql-server-connection-string-to-improve-throughput%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
