Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 17:01:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Snob Art Genre <benedict@echonyc.com> To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Cc: Kenjiro Cho <kjc@csl.sony.co.jp>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bandwidth throttling etc. Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980424165606.18437A-100000@echonyc.com> In-Reply-To: <199804241155.NAA21152@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > actually i was going to ask next if there are stats on the size of > packets, to see if it would be worthwhile increasing the size of an > MBUF to 256 bytes. Stevens suggests on p. 297 of TCP/IPv3 that "It appears that an mbuf cluster should be used sooner (e.g.for the 100-byte point) to reduce the processing time." What are the relative merits of increasing the size of mbufs vs. going right to clusters? Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.3.96.980424165606.18437A-100000>