From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jul 13 11:51:41 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from ussenterprise.ufp.org (ussenterprise.ufp.org [208.185.30.210]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41E9A37B406 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:51:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bicknell@ussenterprise.ufp.org) Received: (from bicknell@localhost) by ussenterprise.ufp.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f6DIpZj27004; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:51:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from bicknell) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:51:35 -0400 From: Leo Bicknell To: Matt Dillon Cc: Leo Bicknell , Drew Eckhardt , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Network performance tuning. Message-ID: <20010713145135.A26818@ussenterprise.ufp.org> Mail-Followup-To: Leo Bicknell , Matt Dillon , Leo Bicknell , Drew Eckhardt , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200107130128.f6D1SFE59148@earth.backplane.com> <200107130217.f6D2HET67695@revolt.poohsticks.org> <20010712223042.A77503@ussenterprise.ufp.org> <200107131708.f6DH8ve65071@earth.backplane.com> <20010713132903.A21847@ussenterprise.ufp.org> <200107131847.f6DIlJv67457@earth.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200107131847.f6DIlJv67457@earth.backplane.com>; from dillon@earth.backplane.com on Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 11:47:19AM -0700 Organization: United Federation of Planets Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 11:47:19AM -0700, Matt Dillon wrote: > Well, you'd be surprised. 90% of the world still uses modems, so > from the point of view of a web server it would be a big win. The Doesn't that sort of make my point though? With the current defaults of 16k/socket there is no trouble filling modems, and no one seems worried about the amount of memory that uses (basically all the installed machines out there are running just fine). So, if we leave a hard minimum of 16k/socket, just chalk that up to waste, and call it good enough we only have to handle the 10% of the world using more. It would be nice to have the code to scale down 100 modem users to 8k, rather than 16k, but that's still only 800k of memory recovery (for 100 simultaneous connections), and we're talking about the ability to support streams that need up to 1M per stream of buffer, so 800k seems "interesting" but not "important". Better would probably be to lower the default to 8k, more than enough for modem users, and let the scale up code hit the few 16k people. *shrug* -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org Systems Engineer - Internetworking Engineer - CCIE 3440 Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message