From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Aug 12 10: 3:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46E015770 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 1999 10:03:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from des@flood.ping.uio.no) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA18653; Thu, 12 Aug 1999 19:01:11 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from des) To: Doug Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , ndear@areti.net, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mbuf clusters. References: <199908111513.QAA21355@post.mail.areti.net> <37B1B1EE.4DCF214F@gorean.org> <37B2F147.1BFC9C39@gorean.org> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 12 Aug 1999 19:01:10 +0200 In-Reply-To: Doug's message of "Thu, 12 Aug 1999 09:07:35 -0700" Message-ID: Lines: 17 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 19.34 Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Doug writes: > I ran highly loaded IRC servers like that for years. In 2.2.8 increasing > maxusers beyond 512 or NMBCLUSTERS above 15k is a pessimization, but those > levels are safe as long as you have the physical ram to handle it. No, they're not. There are "sweet spots" (specific values of maxusers which work), but increasing maxusers beyond 128 on quarter-gig-kva systems basically makes the system unstable. > Unless you also need more of those other things too. :) In our case it > was maxfiles that was the issue. maxfiles can be set at run time. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message