Henning Brauer wrote:
* Per Engelbrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-31 13:45]:
The kern.maxclusters are currently 6144 (standard) on the box. If I
raise it to e.g. 16384 or 12288 I get a:
"sysctl: top level name 16384 is invalid"
- what would be a correct stepwise increasement of the state/value ?
you have some misuse of sysctl.
sysctl kern.maxclusters=12288
or the like.
BTW, is kern.maxclusters a 'mbuf cluster' sysctl MIB "analogy" ?
clusters are allocated dynamically (well, it's a little more
complicated than that, but that's sufficiently close to reality).
kern.maxclusters is the upper limit.
Check.
More BTW, what is the size of a 'mbuf cluster' i obsd ?
2048 bytes
Check.
netstat -m.
if it is 2) there is a leak somewhere, and these are incredibly hard to
track down.
The first peer is running 100Mbps / 'ifconfig' = (100baseTX full-duplex)
The second peer is running 60Mbps / 'ifconfig' = (1000baseT -duplex)
The third peer is running 100Mbps / 'ifconfig' = (100baseTX full-duplex)
sustained?
No, that's what the contract says respectively what 'ifconfig' has
negotiated on the wire/link.
Our second peer is running 60Mbps due to some sort of
contract/pricing/whatever reason and this "awkward" speed mode is set on
their side / their router.
Could the be mbuf thief/reason ?
if you actually push more than 60 MBit/s, that might add up on usage.
On this particular link I could very well have a very high utilization.
I must shamefully admit that I've used 'netstat' statistics for
here-and-now measurements on this box so fare ... and with a limited
32-bit netstat-buffer (4.294.967.296) I'll never know for sure when the
buffer has turned = 'netstat' is not the tool to use on a busy box.
/per
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
