On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 01:29:13PM +0000, Paolo Lucente wrote:
> I'm curious: if mirroring traffic to the box, why resorting to uacctd
> and iptables/etables? You have pmacctd (libpcap-based) readily available
> for such scenario. With uacctd covering the case where traffic is being
> cleanly routed through (or to) the Linux box.

I'm curious if I can acheive better performance for generating sflow
data.  My plan was to use the iptables statistics module to do the
sampling, to ensure that only sampled packets were being sent to
userspace.  Since my sampling target is around 1:2000, this has the
potential to cut down on a lot of work sending packets to userspace
that will be ignored.

Neil at InMon suggested this as a possible tactic for more efficient
sflow generation than sfacctd when looking at around 3Gb/s and
500kpps.  pmacctd appears to be keeping up, but around 55-80% CPU.
Traffic will continue to grow, and I'd like to see if I can't get
performance better to make the system last longer.

Ross

-- 
Ross Vandegrift
[email protected]

"If the fight gets hot, the songs get hotter.  If the going gets tough,
the songs get tougher."
        --Woody Guthrie

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
pmacct-discussion mailing list
http://www.pmacct.net/#mailinglists

Reply via email to