| To: | jeremy.guthrie@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: V2.4 policy router operates faster/better than V2.6 |
| From: | Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:22:57 +0100 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx>, Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@xxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <200501121605.12943.jeremy.guthrie@berbee.com> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0501071416060.5818-100000@localhost.localdomain> <16869.34519.31321.977100@robur.slu.se> <200501121445.51780.jeremy.guthrie@berbee.com> <200501121605.12943.jeremy.guthrie@berbee.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Jeremy M. Guthrie writes:
> I am now getting some push back from the project manager on this performance
> problem. I am wondering if you think faster CPUs will
> a) help relieve the symptoms of this problem
> b) not help because now we will hit a '# of routes in the route-cache'
> problem
> c) or will help to a point till the # interrupts come back and bite us.
Back out the patch I sent.and have hardirq's to run RX-softirq as you
did before but something is very wrong. You didn't answer if there were
other load on the machine...
route-cache can probably be tuned you as have four times the linear seach
I see in one PIII system at 110 kpps w. production traffic.
Of course the non-engineering solution is to buy more CPU... :-)
--ro
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: V2.4 policy router operates faster/better than V2.6, Jeremy M. Guthrie |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH][RFC] etherip: Ethernet-in-IPv4 tunneling, Lennert Buytenhek |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: V2.4 policy router operates faster/better than V2.6, Jeremy M. Guthrie |
| Next by Thread: | Re: V2.4 policy router operates faster/better than V2.6, Jeremy M. Guthrie |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |