Mike Silbersack wrote: > The TCP stack, on the other hand, is perfectly happy with 10ms resolution. > Retransmission timeouts are only actually used when loss occurs on the > network, and 10ms is more than accurate enough for retransmission. (I > believe that retransmit timeouts are rounded up to 1 second, but don't > quote me on that.) The other timed events (keepalive timeouts, delayed > ack timeouts, etc) are also in good shape with 10ms accuracy.
You will get a factor of 6 (approximately) improvement in throughput vs. overhead if you process packets to completion at interrupt, and process writes to completion at write time from the process. Running through NETISR introduces a dequeueing latency that adds incredible latency overhead. I was able to triple the connnections per second rate, to about 22,000, without a SYN cache, by processing this way, and that's running them fully up to the creation of the socket: it's not some fake to-the-stack number that can't be used for useful work without more work that's not counted in the sampling. See the Rice University paper on LRP. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
