| To: | sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Route cache performance under stress |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 08 Jun 2003 23:49:46 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | xerox@xxxxxxxxxx, fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030609064719.GA20613@netnation.com> |
| References: | <20030608234926.GA9453@netnation.com> <001001c32e19$81bc7ea0$4a00000a@badass> <20030609064719.GA20613@netnation.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 23:47:19 -0700 Really, though, shouldn't the route cache overhead be fairly small in comparison to everything else involved in forwarding? If GC is just doing dumb things, it is possible. These costs can be hidden in non-rtcache places in the form of cache misses and displacement on rtcache objects which can show up as higher costs in other places. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Simon Kirby |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Simon Kirby |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Ralph Doncaster |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |