From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 26 14:02:58 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 173A816A4CE; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:02:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (duey.wolves.k12.mo.us [207.160.214.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E339343D1D; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:02:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848351FE4E; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:02:57 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail.wolves.k12.mo.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (duey.wolves.k12.mo.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 29196-01-5; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:02:46 -0600 (CST) Received: by mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E9FAE1FE2B; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:02:46 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86371A922; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:02:46 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:02:46 -0600 (CST) From: Chris Dillon To: Aloha Guy In-Reply-To: <20040226215344.65632.qmail@web41307.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040226155909.E29441@duey.wolves.k12.mo.us> References: <20040226215344.65632.qmail@web41307.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at wolves.k12.mo.us cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD box as router adding latency X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:02:58 -0000 On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Aloha Guy wrote: > > What do you have HZ set to (see sysctl kern.clockrate)? I think I > > remember your original message showing you using pipes and queues > > and the HZ setting can affect those. Also see if your latency > > improves if you remove all pipe and queue rules (other ipfw rules > > are OK). > > > Here is the HZ setting: > > kern.clockrate: { hz = 100, tick = 10000, profhz = 1024, stathz = 128 } > > I'm not sure how to remove the pipe since I don't think the pipe > works until the queue is defined. When I removed the queues that > are configured for the pipe, the latency is back to normal though. Like I said, remove both pipes and queues to test. However, pipes _can_ be used without queues, but that is irrelevant here. Try setting HZ to 1000 in your kernel config, recompile, reboot, and test again. You should see something between a slight improvement to a ten-fold improvement. -- Chris Dillon - cdillon(at)wolves.k12.mo.us FreeBSD: The fastest, most open, and most stable OS on the planet - Available for IA32, IA64, AMD64, PC98, Alpha, and UltraSPARC architectures - PowerPC, ARM, MIPS, and S/390 under development - http://www.freebsd.org Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon?