Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:18:51 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <nobody@nuix.com> To: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com> Cc: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>, Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet tcp_usrreq.c Message-ID: <20010718121851.B26558@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20010718081804.A96027@technokratis.com>; from bmilekic@technokratis.com on Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 08:18:04AM -0400 References: <200107132212.f6DMC3870963@earth.backplane.com> <20010714221719.K30721-100000@achilles.silby.com> <20010718081804.A96027@technokratis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[moving to arch] On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 08:18:04AM -0400, Bosko Milekic wrote: > Well, there is a general misunderstanding going around here. Maxusers > is merely a *HINT* on the amount of KVA space to reserve for the mbuf maps. It > is easily overriden by merely defining NMBCLUSTERS. The only `bogon' is that > NMBCLUSTERS implicitly also defines the number of mbufs. Presently, NMBUFS > gets defined to NMBCLUSTERS * 4, which may or may not be too much, depending > on whether you're using some of Bill Pauls gigE drivers or if your particular > application puts sf_bufs to good use. So do you feel these numbers are not the best for today? > In any case, both NMBUFS and NMBCLUSTERS can be easily overriden with > the respective boot-time tunable parameters. And remember, these values are > merely used to reserve KVA space. BUT they should be pretty reasonable numbers to start with. People continue to "benchmark" FreeBSD out of the box. We need to start paying more attention to the out-of-the-box settings. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010718121851.B26558>