Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:21:57 +0100 (MET) From: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cleaning up TIME_WAIT states (fwd) Message-ID: <199701190721.IAA11949@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
There was a discussion on the end2end list lately about TIME_WAIT
states, and these look like a interesting suggestions. What's our
implementation (3.0 I guess) ? Garret/David perhaps you can tell
something ?
Thanks
Luigi
> From majordom@ISI.EDU Sat Jan 18 23:00:36 1997
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:52:15 -0500
> From: "David S. Miller" <davem@jenolan.rutgers.edu>
> To: rstevens@kohala.com
> Subject: Re: cleaning up TIME_WAIT states
>
> From: rstevens@kohala.com (W. Richard Stevens)
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:32:25 -0700
>
> When BSDI upgraded their stack this past summer to make their Web
> server "faster", they moved all the connections in the TIME_WAIT
> state onto their own queue, to get them out of the tcp_slowtimo()
> function. I'd bet that's the majority of the CPU savings right
> there. (I've always thought that the BSD tcp_{slow,fast}timo()
> functions must be one of the biggest bottlenecks on a busy system.)
>
> Another technique I've seen thrown around was to keep track of the
> timeouts using a heap. The idea is that the CPU overhead is mostly
> from the search times, if you can begin to bound that search time even
> when the list becomes huge due to all the TIME_WAIT connections, it
> would help tremendously.
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701190721.IAA11949>