Hello, finally got some time to test...
Table w. 214k routes with full rDoS on two intrefaces on 2 x AMD64 processors,
speed 2814.43 MHz. Profiled with CPU_CLK_UNHALTED and rtstat
w/o latest patch fib_trie pathes. Tput ~233 kpps
samples %symbol name
109925 14.4513 fn_trie_lookup
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:36:45 +0100
Robert Olsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Stephen Hemminger writes:
>
> > Dumping by prefix is possible, but unless 32x slower. Dumping in
> > address order is just as logical. Like I said, I'm investigating what
> > quagga handles.
>
> How about taking
Stephen Hemminger writes:
> Dumping by prefix is possible, but unless 32x slower. Dumping in
> address order is just as logical. Like I said, I'm investigating what
> quagga handles.
How about taking a snapshot to in address order (as you did) to some
allocated memory, returning from that
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:06:47 +0100
Robert Olsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Stephen Hemminger writes:
>
> > Time to handle a full BGP load (163K of routes).
> >
> > Before:LoadDumpFlush
> >
> > kmem_cache 3.8 13.07.2
> > iter
Robert Olsson wrote:
Stephen Hemminger writes:
> Time to handle a full BGP load (163K of routes).
>
> Before: Load Dump Flush
>
> kmem_cache3.8 13.07.2
> iter 3.9 12.36.9
> unordered 3.1 11.9
Stephen Hemminger writes:
> Time to handle a full BGP load (163K of routes).
>
> Before: LoadDumpFlush
>
> kmem_cache 3.8 13.07.2
> iter 3.9 12.36.9
> unordered3.1 11.9
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:37:33 -0800
>
> Time to handle a full BGP load (163K of routes).
>
> Before: LoadDumpFlush
> hash 3.5 0.50.7
> 2.6.23.14 3.4 19.3
Time to handle a full BGP load (163K of routes).
Before: LoadDumpFlush
hash3.5 0.50.7
2.6.23.14 3.4 19.310.3
net-2.6.25 3.4 18.79.8
After:
kmem_cache 3.8
