From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 16 10:04:03 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A79516A420 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:04:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie) Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie (salmon.maths.tcd.ie [134.226.81.11]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 59C0743D45 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:04:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie) Received: from jbell.maths.tcd.ie ([134.226.81.45] helo=jbell.maths.tcd.ie) by salmon.maths.tcd.ie with SMTP id ; 16 Feb 2006 10:04:01 +0000 (GMT) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:03:59 +0000 From: David Malone To: Mike Tancsa Message-ID: <20060216100359.GA10327@jbell.maths.tcd.ie> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20060215221957.076524f8@64.7.153.2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.0.20060215221957.076524f8@64.7.153.2> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tcp throughput and net.inet.tcp.inflight.enable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:04:03 -0000 On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 11:17:41PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote: > For a local server, is there any reason why I would want to keep > net.inet.tcp.inflight.enable on ? I was kind of surprised at the > difference in the results with it on and off I think in a situation where your network is fast and large amounts of buffering do not imply high latency, then the inflight limiting stuff probably isn't useful. (I have some coworkers who reckon that inflight limiting can do the wrong thing in other situations too, but they haven't had a chance to investigate their suspicions yet.) David.