Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:43:46 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@networx.ch> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Subject: Re: auto tuning tcp Message-ID: <EB2C22B5-C18D-4AC2-8694-C5C0D96C07B3@mu.org> In-Reply-To: <50A0C0F4.8010706@networx.ch> References: <50A0A0EF.3020109@mu.org> <50A0A502.1030306@networx.ch> <50A0B8DA.9090409@mu.org> <50A0C0F4.8010706@networx.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 12, 2012, at 1:27 AM, Andre Oppermann <oppermann@networx.ch> wrote: > On 12.11.2012 09:52, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> On 11/11/12 11:28 PM, Andre Oppermann wrote: >>> On 12.11.2012 08:10, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >>>> I noticed that TCBHASHSIZE does not autotune. >>>> >>>> What do you think of the following algorithm? >>>> >>>> Basically round down to next power of two based on nmbclusters / 64. >>> >>> Please wait out for a real fix of the various mbuf-whatever tuning >>> issue I'll propose shortly. This approach may become inapproriate. >>> Also the mbuf limits can be changed at runtime by sysctl. >>> >> What is the timeline you are asking for to wait? > > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/242910 Very cool! So instead of nmbclusters, will maxsockets work? Ideas/suggestions? -Alfred.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EB2C22B5-C18D-4AC2-8694-C5C0D96C07B3>