On 2007/11/15 23:50, Thomas Althoff wrote: > > Depends which routes you take. You probably want 1GB if you receive > > full routes. Given there's no cisco tax on RAM here, this is quite > > viable. :-) > > Here's my view with two providers with full routes also running 4.2.
The stats at the end of 'bgpctl reload' are more interesting if you want to size memory. Especially if you're running on a secondary storage device you'd rather not swap to. This is from a peering router (70 sessions, full table split across a couple of it's neighbours plus about 3500 peer routes) - 1G ram, amd64 (anyone else who experienced the pae pmap bug will understand; I would probably choose i386 now...) This is slightly old code as the box has been up for 6 months (yes, bgpd is pretty reliable :) slacking -> load averages: 0.09, 0.11, 0.11 23:07:27 48 processes: 47 idle, 1 on processor CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 1.0% system, 1.0% interrupt, 98.0% idle Memory: Real: 249M/489M act/tot Free: 500M Swap: 0K/0K used/tot PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE WAIT TIME CPU COMMAND 15157 _bgpd 2 0 5844K 6740K sleep poll 786:34 0.20% bgpd: session engine 27390 _bgpd 2 0 92M 93M sleep poll 541:17 0.00% bgpd: route decision e 30126 root 2 0 17M 18M sleep poll 80:31 0.00% bgpd: parent just finishing up a reload -> load averages: 0.97, 0.40, 0.22 23:09:12 48 processes: 1 running, 46 idle, 1 on processor CPU states: 95.8% user, 0.0% nice, 1.4% system, 2.8% interrupt, 0.0% idle Memory: Real: 444M/684M act/tot Free: 305M Swap: 0K/0K used/tot PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE WAIT TIME CPU COMMAND 27390 _bgpd 56 0 286M 287M run - 542:56 98.39% bgpd: route decision e 30126 root 2 0 17M 18M sleep poll 80:31 0.05% bgpd: parent 15157 _bgpd 2 0 5840K 6736K sleep poll 786:34 0.00% bgpd: session engine I wouldn't choose to run full tables with <1G.
