Andre Oppermann wrote:
John-Mark Gurney wrote:
mbufs are 256 bytes.
Thats what I had thought :-)
Hmmm.. If we switched clusters to 1536 bytes in size, we'd be able to
fit 8 in 12k (though I guess for 8k page boxes we'd do 16 in 24k)... The
only issue w/ that would be that a few of the clusters would possibly
split page boundaries... How much this would effect performance would
be an interesting question to answer...
Splitting page boundaries is not an option as it may not be physically
contigous.
That can be rather hazardous :-)
Just don't overengineer the stuff. Mbufs are only used temporarily and
a bit theoretical waste is not much a problem (so far at least).
Yes, but I think a combination of less copying and a bit
better use of space could help overall.. but I guess as
they say the "proof is in the pudding" so I will have to
play a bit..
R
--
Randall Stewart
NSSTG - Cisco Systems Inc.
803-345-0369 <or> 815-342-5222 (cell)
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
