On Tuesday 26 June 2007, JD Bronson wrote:
Anyone using device polling on 6.2stable (i386) ?
I have been using it.
I have been reading up on this and seen some good and some bad but
nothing definitive.
Basically you improve efficiency at the cost of latency, so expect lower CPU
usage. To
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 06:20:30 -0500, in sentex.lists.freebsd.questions
you wrote:
bge0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500
options=5bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,POLLING
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
status: active
Paul Schmehl wrote:
I've been reading about device polling. I'm wondering if it's worth
doing on a busy website (4,000,000+ hits/month, 45GB+ bandwidth use). I
understand what polling is and how it queues traffic as opposed to the
old-fashioned interrupt method, but do you really gain
There is an assumption that it would be faster to have 2 cpus process
the interupts than to use polling which can run on one processor at a
time. On my system, it appears to be faster to use polling. I have a
dual xeon 2.0 ghz.
On Nov 15, 2004, at 5:57 AM, Axel S. Gruner wrote:
Hi.
I am just
In a message dated 9/25/04 4:12:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
FreeBSD team for developing a stack that uses no resources.
For the record, what I was saying was that a decent machine (e.g. 2.4
PIV) should be able to push 200,000 packets per second with
In a message dated 9/25/04 4:24:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The EVIDENCE is to the contrary, since it seems that a 2.4Ghz system
will be saturated when bridging ~250Kpps with device-polling enabled,
based on polling stats and userland benchmarking, even though the
In a message dated 9/27/04 3:04:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike at sentex.net previously wrote:
Given a decent CPU, you wont see very much of a load average at all in the
200Kpps / 100Mb range.
Note that load average and CPU usage are two intirely different
In a message dated 9/24/04 11:28:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
I thought I'd reword my question since no one seemed to understand the first
time.
Is there a way to measure CPU kernel/interrupt usage when device polling is
enabled on 4.x systems? top and systat both
At 09:57 AM 25/09/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
As long as all your interfaces support polling, you should see
hardly see any interrupt usage at all, as that is the whole point of
polling. You can allocate more or less CPU cycles to flinging packets
around via various sysctl settings.
In a message dated 9/25/04 10:17:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
At 09:57 AM 25/09/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
As long as all your interfaces support polling, you should see
hardly see any interrupt usage at all, as that is the whole point of
polling. You can
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ... ]
Ah, so the capacity of a FreeBSD router is 10 million packets per second,
since 200K pps only uses .1 % of system resources. Kudos to the FreeBSD team
for developing a stack that uses no resources.
It seems beyond unreasonable that, with interrupts enabled,
In a message dated 9/25/04 1:06:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
It seems beyond unreasonable that, with interrupts enabled, 55% of the
system
is used, and with polling, ~ zero.
Inconceivable!
Erm...I do not think that word means what you think it means.
It's probably
At 11:40 AM 25/09/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, so the capacity of a FreeBSD router is 10 million packets per
second, since 200K pps only uses .1 % of system resources. Kudos to the
FreeBSD team for developing a stack that uses no resources.
For the record, what I was saying was that
it was said by [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jamie Cohen:
The EVIDENCE is to the contrary, since it seems that a 2.4Ghz system
will be saturated when bridging ~250Kpps with device-polling enabled,
based on polling stats and userland benchmarking, even though the
system claims to be 100% idle. Interestingly,
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:47:52 EDT, in sentex.lists.freebsd.questions
you wrote:
I thought I'd reword my question since no one seemed to understand the first
time.
Is there a way to measure CPU kernel/interrupt usage when device polling is
enabled on 4.x systems? top and systat both show 100%
15 matches
Mail list logo
