From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Oct 16 11:34:32 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (castles549.castles.com [208.214.165.113]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DF7615227 for ; Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:34:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA06742; Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:26:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199910161826.LAA06742@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: "Jimbo Bahooli" Cc: "Mike Smith" , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Balancing Outgoing traffic over 2 nics, and nic limitations. In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 16 Oct 1999 13:25:23 CDT." <199910161325230440.0DE208AE@207.109.8.249> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:26:23 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > Of course its a switched network with full duplex operation. But now > that the general answer is that it is not a limitation of the nic card > I am going to look elsewhere. I was not to sure if it was actually a > limit myself, its just that I observed it on two different machines. You should be looking at some basic system statistics to see where your limiting factor actually is; try watching 'systat -vmstat 1' while you're hitting your limit. > They however were not huge powerhouses, one was a p2-450, and one was a > dual p2 333. Both running real new versions of 3.3-stable. Note also that Apache isn't the fastest of animals; you might want to use a lighter-weight server like thttpd if all you're doing is serving static content. -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message