From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 15 15:39:14 2003 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 633BD37B401 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.pair.com (relay.pair.com [209.68.1.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9877643FB1 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:39:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: (qmail 71594 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2003 22:39:12 -0000 Received: from niwun.pair.com (HELO localhost) (209.68.2.70) by relay.pair.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 2003 22:39:12 -0000 X-pair-Authenticated: 209.68.2.70 Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 17:38:39 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack To: Scot Loach In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030715173449.R18075@odysseus.silby.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: "'freebsd-net@freebsd.org'" Subject: Re: Kernel tuning for large maxsockets 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: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 22:39:14 -0000 On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Scot Loach wrote: > Is there any reason I should not modify the kernel code to only let a small, > fixed number of raw and divert pcbs be preallocated instead of having them > scale with maxsockets? Your idea is sound. > Next, does this seem like a generally useful thing that could be rolled back > into the source tree? I could make this a kernel option or a tunable sysctl > variable. > > thanks > > Scot Loach A tunable maximum for each of those settings sounds good, that should fit well in subr_param.c. Send me your patch when it's done, and I'll look into incorporating it. Mike "Silby" Silbersack