On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Simon Kirby wrote:
> "vmstat 1") except in attack cases. The difference is probably just the
> fact that this is running on slightly faster hardware (single Athlon
> 1800MP, Tyan Tiger MPX board).
What happened to Linux users being able to brag about how much they could
do with CPUs that were useless for running Windows? On a 1Ghz CPU you've
got almost 7,000 cycles to route a packet in order to handle 148kpps. I
can't see why the slow path should be more than 2,000 cycles.
I know some people's attitude is don't talk if you're not going to write
the code. If I had the time I would; from my earliest days of programming
I've been optimizing performance to the maximum. I can still remember
using page 0 on my c64 to store an 8-bit register in 3 cycles instead of
four...
So to put a stake in the ground, I'd like to see a 1Ghz celeron with e1000
cards handle 148kpps of DOS traffic at <50% CPU utilization (with full
routing tables & no firewalling). If that's not a reasonable expectation,
someone please let me know. Even if my time was only worth $500/day, in
the past year and a half I spent enough time working on Linux routers to
buy a Cisco NPE-G1. :-(
-Ralph
|