From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Aug 25 15:53:01 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6EA1106564A
	for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:53:01 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com)
Received: from mail-ey0-f172.google.com (mail-ey0-f172.google.com
	[209.85.215.172])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 820818FC0C
	for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:53:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by eye4 with SMTP id 4so1559223eye.31
	for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 08:53:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
	bh=XmXd81QJQvWq3Ut9NDEyOjaNf/3jedDBwSV5/O+E44c=;
	b=tWY5ujLtrWnx8sX+HdpxrRiSswEPKNXpnMIWOM5CC4MZGX39Z/NRF1E65WeKcbAOdy
	lxkQ4KmjR1w1/ehDe6OQbc6gXVk8XbHo5bJAL4WDUT87hbBD7vriUhZG7XCq/lq0jIlh
	kMkxsN/zUMAD/APtUioSyv+OeVfIQ8Fafqh/8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.136.18 with SMTP id j18mr3548561wfd.284.1314287579690;
	Thu, 25 Aug 2011 08:52:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.66.106 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 08:52:59 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:52:59 +0000
Message-ID: <CAGFTUwNLfmVYjP0MtHyi4RYCsUH_SJzhgte7zxeNY+zRYiuxUA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com>
To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, George Neville-Neil <gnn@neville-neil.com>, 
	"Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: 
Subject: Re: Updating our TCP and socket sysctl values...
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bf1783@gmail.com
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:53:02 -0000

> >> I believe it's time to up these values to something that's in line with higher speed
> >> local networks, such as 10G.  Perhaps it's time to move these to 2MB instead of 256K.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >
> >
> > This never happened, did it?  Was there a reason?
> >
>
> I went back and looked at the mail thread.  I didn't see any strong objections
> so I think you should commit this for 9.x.
>
> np@ did point out that nmbclusters also lags on modern hardware so consider upping
> that at the same time.

I thought Bruce's observation, in:

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2011-March/011193.html

that:

"...there is an mostly-unrelated bufferbloat problem that is
purely local.  If you have a buffer that is larger than an Ln cache (or
about half than), then actually using just a single buffer of that size
guarantees thrashing of the Ln cache, so that almost every memory access
is an Ln cache miss.  Even with current hardware, a buffer of size 256K
will thrash most L1 caches and a buffer of size a few MB will thrash most
L2 caches."

, and his suggestion for some sort of auto-tuning, deserve
consideration.  Are you going to address this problem (at least the L2
and higher cache thrashing), or give some suggestions for tuning in
UPDATING and the relevant manpages?

b.