Ah, I see now. That would be my misunderstanding, from following the "flow-limit" and "flow_limit" configuration options and equating them with each other. I plan to send a fresh version.
On 19 February 2014 14:20, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > bridge_reconfigure() reads other-config:max-idle from the Open_vSwitch > table. That part is fine. I'm complaining about max_idle in the > Flow_Table table. Why do both exist? > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:00:44PM -0800, Joe Stringer wrote: > > Hmm. The way I follow it is that bridge_reconfigure() will read it from > the > > table, and call ofproto_set_max_idle() to set the ofproto_flow_idle > > variable. Later, in revalidate_udumps(), we take a local copy of > > ofproto_flow_idle, and this is used later in the function (by code that > > already exists). > > > > I've just tested it, and it works as expected - e.g., setting a value of > 1 > > makes us delete flows from the datapath incredibly quickly, as observed > via > > ovs-appctl upcall/show. Is the "minInteger"/"maxInteger" meant to prevent > > the user from setting values outside that range, or are they merely > > suggestions for the manual? > > > > > > On 19 February 2014 13:45, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:01:39AM -0800, Joe Stringer wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer <joestrin...@nicira.com> > > > > > > This patch adds a new "max_idle" column to the Flow_Table table, and > > > documents it, but doesn't appear to use it anywhere in actual code. > > > >
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
