Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 16:31:09 -0500 (CDT) From: Conrad Sabatier <conrads@cox.net> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@cell.sick.ru> Cc: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] mbuma is in the tree Message-ID: <XFMail.20040601163109.conrads@cox.net> In-Reply-To: <20040601063642.GD69572@cell.sick.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01-Jun-2004 Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > Bosko, > > On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 02:51:01PM -0700, Bosko Milekic wrote: > B> In order to avoid having to type everything again, I'll refer > B> to the commit log. PLEASE READ IT IN FULL: > B> > B> Bring in mbuma to replace mballoc. > B> > B> mbuma is an Mbuf & Cluster allocator built on top of a number of > B> extensions to the UMA framework, all included herein. > > Have you done any performance tests? How this new allocator affects > network performance? > > How stable is it? :) Yesterday I was planning to upgrade CURRENT on > my production router. Should I do it? I went ahead and upgraded as soon as I saw the announcement, mainly just for the new capability of using an unlimited mbufs setting. It seems to be working just fine. I've experienced no problems with it whatsoever so far. No negative impact on network performance. Nice work there, Bosko! (now, if we could just get the ACPI-related hangs at shutdown fixed) :-) -- Conrad Sabatier <conrads@cox.net> - "In Unix veritas"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20040601163109.conrads>