I agree, it would be helpful to have a sentence like that. This could be particularly misleading given that it is relating to datapath flows, which is completely different from OpenFlow rule timeouts. Do you think that this is clear enough with the current description?
On 27 February 2014 10:50, Justin Pettit <jpet...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:37 AM, Joe Stringer <joestrin...@nicira.com> wrote: > > > + The maximum idle time in milliseconds for flows to be > cached in the > > + datapath. A lower value may improve flow setup performance, > but > > + decrease the number of cached flows in the datapath. > Conversely, a > > + higher value allows more flows to be maintained in the > cache at the > > + expense of flow setup performance. > > We get a lot of questions about locking particular flows in the kernel, > and I'm afraid this description might give the impression that this will be > the actual time it's kept in the kernel. (The name of the variable > indicates that that's not the case, but I think most people will miss > that.) What about adding a sentence like the following to the end? > > "Note that ovs-vswitchd may expire flows more quickly than the configured > value based on system load and other factors." > > --Justin > > >
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
