From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Oct 19 17:45:08 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE72106566C;
	Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:45:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rihad@mail.ru)
Received: from mx34.mail.ru (mx34.mail.ru [94.100.176.48])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA37C8FC1A;
	Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:45:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [217.25.27.27] (port=60365 helo=[217.25.27.27])
	by mx34.mail.ru with asmtp 
	id 1MzwI0-0001ak-00; Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:45:01 +0400
Message-ID: <4ADCA59C.3090601@mail.ru>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:45:00 +0500
From: rihad <rihad@mail.ru>
User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090706)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Oleg Bulyzhin <oleg@FreeBSD.org>
References: <20091007085902.GA88982@lath.rinet.ru> <4ACC5E23.8090405@mail.ru>
	<20091007100503.GB88982@lath.rinet.ru> <4ACC6A7B.5050808@mail.ru>
	<20091007104525.GC88982@lath.rinet.ru>
	<4ACC7308.6070301@mail.ru> <4ACCC30E.7080504@elischer.org>
	<4ACCC4F3.3030302@mail.ru> <20091008060608.GA23793@lath.rinet.ru>
	<4ACE10CF.2030806@elischer.org>
	<20091009082743.GB70940@lath.rinet.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20091009082743.GB70940@lath.rinet.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam: Not detected
X-Mras: Ok
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: dummynet dropping too many packets
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 19 Oct 2009 17:45:08 -0000

Oleg Bulyzhin wrote:
> One more idea to check:
> 
> What happens if you rearrange your rules to shape 'in' packets?
> i.e. use 'in recv bce0' instead of 'out recv bce0 xmit bce1'.

Wow, shape incoming packets? That's a good one - the packets could still 
buffer up waiting to be output. I'm not sure this will eliminate 
burstiness (if it IS the problem), but I'll no doubt try this if current 
changes don't prove to be helpful. Currently we've been running running 
a "ifq_drv_maxlen = 4096;" kernel with HZ=4000 for a few hours, 0 drops 
so far with around 2700 entries in each of the two IPFW tables (no big 
surprise so far, we had this with maxlen=1024 too with under 3000 entries).