>other implementations has no problems with sorted output, even for
>hundreds thousands of routes in table.
That is not my problem, nor a valid argument at all. By the way, when writing
about significantly slower output, it still does not mean any problems like
getting BIRD stuck or bloated.
Hello,
other implementations has no problems with sorted output, even for
hundreds thousands of routes in table.
It also can be implemented as a some configuration option or as a
command parameter (something like "show ... sorted"), if you're worry
about significant performance degradation.
Unsor
On October 18, 2018 10:44:36 AM GMT+02:00, Daniel Suchy
wrote:
>Hello,
>I think sorting should not be limited only to "show routes" output.
Beware. The sorted output may be significantly slower than the unsorted. The
unsorted route list will remain the default.
>Also
>other show commands n
Hello,
I think sorting should not be limited only to "show routes" output. Also
other show commands needs to be sorted in human-readable order (like
show protocols, show bfd sessions etc). In large-scale deployments (like
IXP route-servers, where you're also have limited commands available
within l
-users@network.cz
Sent: Thu, 18 Oct 2018
11:04:08 +0200
Subject: Re: bgp sorted tables
> Hi!
>
> The sorted keyword is used for sorting different routes for the same prefix
> to be available for the first-pass-the-filter exports. This should work and
> we aren't aware about an
Hi!
The sorted keyword is used for sorting different routes for the same prefix to
be available for the first-pass-the-filter exports. This should work and we
aren't aware about any changes that could break it. If you have a reproducer,
please share it with us to be able to debug it.
I suspec
Hello,
I'm trying to use sorted table feature (despite it is described as a little bit
slower)
I'm trying on 1.6.3, 1.6.4 with table master sorted;
also on 2.0.2 format ipv4 table master4 sorted;
But is does not seem to work, when show route from birdc routes are still in
random order.
anyone
