| To: | Patrick Schaaf <bof@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze |
| From: | Patrick Schaaf <bof@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 29 Jul 2002 18:45:20 +0200 |
| Cc: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-core@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20020729184239.E570@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from bof@xxxxxx on Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 06:42:39PM +0200 |
| References: | <20020729131239.A5183@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.GSO.4.30.0207290719580.12604-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020729182659.D570@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020729183116.B27940@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020729184239.E570@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
> This week (probably wednesday) I'll put both my netfilter hook statistic > patch, and enabled kernel profiling, onto a production box (the transproxy > thing from the bucket occupation analysis). Right now I have totally > undersized bucket count on that machine (7168 buckets for 10 times > the tuples), so I'll first measure the "accidental long list walk" > situation, and then retry with a suitable bucket size. Before somebody get the wrong idea: the machine I mentioned, serves as a squid proxy for over 3000 narrowband dialup users (all web traffic), and it has no performance problems at all with that. For all I know, any optimization we may make regarding netfilter, won't make the squids on that box work perceivably better. I have permanent average and median service time monitoring to prove or disprove this assertion :-) best regards Patrick |
| Previous by Date: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze, Patrick Schaaf |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze, Martin Josefsson |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze, Patrick Schaaf |
| Next by Thread: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |