On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 13:00:25 +0530 Krishna Kumar2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 > 12:48:48 PM: > > > You may see worse performance with batching in the real world when > > running over WAN's. Like TSO, batching will generate back to back packet > > trains that are subject to multi-packet synchronized loss. The problem is > that > > intermediate router queues are often close to full, and when a long > string > > of packets arrives back to back only the first ones will get in, the rest > > get dropped. Normal sends have at least minimal pacing so they are less > > likely do get synchronized drop. > > Hi Stephen, > > OK. The difference that I could see is that in existing code, the "minimal > pacing" also could lead to (possibly slighly lesser) loss since sends are > quick iterations at the IP layer, while in batching sends are iterative at > the driver layer. > > Is it an issue ? Any suggestions ? Not an immediate issue, but it is the kind of thing that could cause performance regression reports if it was used on every interface by default. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
