[Top] [All Lists]

Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>
Date: 5 May 2005 20:07:43 +0200
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 20:07:43 +0200
Cc: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Jens.Laas@xxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1115297370.7680.58.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <> <> <1115297370.7680.58.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
> Great patch it is - but why do you say "99.999% of all users" feel they
> would love this? Clearly perfomance at the low routes area is not

What I wanted to say is that 99.999% of all users dont need the
cisco grade BGP4 capable standard FIB, it is a just wasted complexity
and memory for them.

> something that is a huge difference against standard fib. And you suffer
> miserably at latge route size.
> Is it memory consumption you are thinking of?

Yes, and complexity.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>