Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 08:23:37 -0400 From: Steve Bertrand <iaccounts@ibctech.ca> To: Sten Daniel Soersdal <netslists@gmail.com> Cc: mattr@eagle.ca, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Quagga as border router Message-ID: <46F3B7C9.7050605@ibctech.ca> In-Reply-To: <46F23D74.9000701@gmail.com> References: <46F1AC0B.9040109@ibctech.ca> <46F1BDE1.8090102@gmail.com> <46F1F136.3010203@ibctech.ca> <46F23D74.9000701@gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> I'm not saying you should use polling. I'm saying that not using polling > makes for more context switches. 64bit registers are twice as large as > 32bit registers. There will be a bigger penalty on stack/memory usage > and therefore slower transitions from one context to another (read: > handling a packet). > This might be mitigated by having a very large cpu cache. > > It may or may not make much of a difference considering stacks are > aligned, i was just theorizing. Ok, I get what you are saying now. > Just curious: Is there a reason you can't advertise your entire > allocated block and receive two full feeds? Well to be honest, there is no reason why I couldn't receive full routes with the new box. My current router couldn't handle the full route table, but any new router will be able to. Regards, Stevehome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46F3B7C9.7050605>