On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:43:17PM -0700, Neil McKee wrote: > > On Aug 18, 2011, at 6:55 PM, Jesse Gross wrote: > > > On Aug 19, 2011 6:41 AM, "Neil McKee" <neil.mc...@inmon.com> wrote: > > > > > Another check worth confirming is that the random number generator > > > you are using will always converge exactly to the intended 1-in-N > > > mean (before too long). That gives you another fall-back > > > position. > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by "fall-back position"? > > > I meant that you have the option of just incrementing the sample-pool > by the mean (N) for every sample taken.
That's a clever idea. For the record, that's probably not a good approach for Open vSwitch because in various overload situation the buffers between kernel and userspace can overflow. When that happens, packets are lost and there is no easy way to count how many packets were lost, so we would lose track of the sample pool at that point. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
