Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 03:46:38 +0200 From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: performance of jailed processes Message-ID: <xzp7jx1okjl.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040330202616.1917E-100000@fledge.watson.org> (Robert Watson's message of "Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:27:04 -0500 (EST)") References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040330202616.1917E-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> Are your aliases configured on lo0, or on the ethernet interface?
They're on the NIC. I tried moving one of them to lo0 (made sure
forwarding was enabled) and saw essentially no difference. Average
ping time went slightly down, but well within standard deviation, so
it may have been a fluke. Mysql performance was neither worse nor
better.
> Could
> we see some excerpted ifconfig output for your interface (perhaps only ten
> -- first five, last five of the 2000+ IP addresses :-).=20
There are only ~1000:
fxp0: flags=3D8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 1.2.80.2 netmask 0xffffffe0 broadcast 1.2.80.31
inet 1.2.84.2 netmask 0xfffffe00 broadcast 1.2.85.255
inet 1.2.84.3 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.2.84.3
inet 1.2.84.4 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.2.84.4
inet 1.2.84.5 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.2.84.5
[...]
inet 1.2.87.250 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.2.87.250
inet 1.2.87.251 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.2.87.251
inet 1.2.87.252 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.2.87.252
inet 1.2.87.253 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.2.87.253
inet 1.2.87.254 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.2.87.254
ether 00:12:34:56:78:9a
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>)
status: active
DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzp7jx1okjl.fsf>