From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov 12 08:52:44 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E23DBFAB;
 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:52:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@mu.org)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C62C18FC08;
 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:52:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-5.local
 (c-67-180-208-218.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.208.218])
 by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2EFF91A3CCD;
 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 00:52:44 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <50A0B8DA.9090409@mu.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 00:52:42 -0800
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@networx.ch>
Subject: Re: auto tuning tcp
References: <50A0A0EF.3020109@mu.org> <50A0A502.1030306@networx.ch>
In-Reply-To: <50A0A502.1030306@networx.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
 Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:52:44 -0000

On 11/11/12 11:28 PM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 12.11.2012 08:10, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>> I noticed that TCBHASHSIZE does not autotune.
>>
>> What do you think of the following algorithm?
>>
>> Basically round down to next power of two based on nmbclusters / 64.
>
> Please wait out for a real fix of the various mbuf-whatever tuning
> issue I'll propose shortly.  This approach may become inapproriate.
> Also the mbuf limits can be changed at runtime by sysctl.
>
What is the timeline you are asking for to wait?

-Alfred