Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 12:31:15 -0700 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Routing Table Memory Message-ID: <199908081931.MAA12716@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 09 Aug 1999 00:41:13 EDT." <199908081626.MAA02351@etinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > What flavor of memory tuning can be used to figure out how much the routing > table will have (and what tool can be used to monitor it, other than the > total usage shown in vmstat)? > > A machine with 64M refuses to allocate more than ~10M (about 36K routes) no > matter how many users or clusters are allocated. NetBSD systems have no > trouble holding full tables (17M) in a 64k system. > > Not that 128M is so expensive, but I'd like to know how to optimize it for > more efficient usage of memory. Route entries are just allocated out of the kernel memory pool; I would suggest upping VM_KMEM_SIZE (size of kernel memory in bytes), either as a compile-time option or using the kern.vm.kmem.size tunable as documented in 'help set tunables' inside the loader (may not be available in the version you're using depending on how you're set up). You might also try setting VM_KMEM_SIZE_SCALE to something smaller than 4 (memory size is divided by this to determine kernel VM size); this is a compile-only option, and for a machine that does almost nothing in userspace it may be more appropriate to use something like 2 (use up to half of physical memory for the kerne). -- \\ The mind's the standard \\ Mike Smith \\ of the man. \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ -- Joseph Merrick \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199908081931.MAA12716>