Re: Route cache performance under stress

From: Martin Josefsson (gandalf@wlug.westbo.se)
Date: Thu May 22 2003 - 08:03:07 EST

Next message: Ethan Sommer: "Re: [Fwd: [ANNOUNCE] Layer-7 Filter for Linux QoS]"
Previous message: Simon Kirby: "Re: Route cache performance under stress"
In reply to: Simon Kirby: "Re: Route cache performance under stress"
Next in thread: David S. Miller: "Re: Route cache performance under stress"
Reply: David S. Miller: "Re: Route cache performance under stress"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 13:44, Simon Kirby wrote:

> Nice! I tested with 300,000 routing table entries and there is no
> discernable difference in performance from having an empty table.
> vmstat shows the same idle time as when the routing table is empty.

How much memory does a table that large use?

-- 
/Martin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Next message: Ethan Sommer: "Re: [Fwd: [ANNOUNCE] Layer-7 Filter for Linux QoS]"
Previous message: Simon Kirby: "Re: Route cache performance under stress"
In reply to: Simon Kirby: "Re: Route cache performance under stress"
Next in thread: David S. Miller: "Re: Route cache performance under stress"
Reply: David S. Miller: "Re: Route cache performance under stress"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 23 2003 - 22:00:03 EST