On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 06:02:17PM +0400, Oleg wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 01:25:32AM +0200, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: > > Hello > > > > Answering collectively for the whole thread: > > > > I did some preliminary testing and it on my test machine exporting full > > BGP feed (cca 400k routes) to a kernel table took 1-2 sec on Linux and > > 5-6 sec on BSD. Similar time for flushing the kernel table. Therefore, > > if we devote a half CPU for kernel sync, we have about 200 kr/s (kiloroutes > > per second) for Linux and 40 kr/s for BSD, this still seems more than > > enough for an edge router. Are there any estimates (using protocol > > statistics) > > for number of updates to kernel proto in this case? How many protocols, > > tables and ppie do you have in your case? > > I think, i don't understand correctly about estimates. From each of our > upstreams > we get full view(~400k routes). And if one upstream session is up/down, i > think, > kernel receive ~400k updates. > I have totaly 5 tables, 5 kernel protocols, 8 bgp protocols, 2 pipes.
BTW, you could try the current code from GIT, it should fix the problem of blocking BIRD for too long when protocol goes down. (commit fb829de69052755a31d76d73e17525d050e5ff4d) -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'SanTiago' Zajicek (email: [email protected]) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
