Re: Polling tuning and performance

2006-12-15 Thread Bruce Evans
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Alan Amesbury wrote: Bruce Evans wrote: ... The (extremely busy) interface is exclusively incoming traffic, received promiscuously. Since that's provided enough clues as to what this box might actually be doing, I'll give away the secret: It's running snort. :-) I don

Re: Polling tuning and performance

2006-12-15 Thread Alan Amesbury
Bruce, thanks for taking time to read and reply. For brevity, I've removed my own earlier writings, (usually) annotating what's missing. Bruce Evans wrote: [snip - PREEMPTION stuff] > It's needed to prevent packet loss without polling. It probably makes > little difference with polling (if the

Re: Polling tuning and performance

2006-12-15 Thread Bruce Evans
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Alan Amesbury wrote: ... What I'm aiming for, of course, is zero packet loss. Realizing that's probably impossible for this system given its load, I'm trying to do what I can to minimize loss. ... * PREEMPTION disabled - /sys/conf/NOTES says this helps with

Polling tuning and performance

2006-12-14 Thread Alan Amesbury
This is a long one, but mainly because I've tried to include notes about what I've already looked at. Thanks in advance for taking the time to read this. I have a FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE/amd64 system which routinely needs to accept traffic at fairly high speeds. The system is accepting traffic at fa