On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 09:56:49AM +0530, Numan Siddique wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 2:28 AM Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 12:28:31AM +0530, Numan Siddique wrote:
> > > On my Fedora 29 when ever I run all the ovs tests with "-j5", I see few
> > > core dumps generated for
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019, 2:28 AM Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 12:28:31AM +0530, Numan Siddique wrote:
> > On my Fedora 29 when ever I run all the ovs tests with "-j5", I see few
> > core dumps generated for ovsdb-server and python2.
>
> There are a couple of tests that intentionally
OK.
We haven't characterized OVS latency in such fine detail. I encourage
you to investigate, but I will not look into this myself.
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 02:48:37AM +, sunquanying wrote:
> “Delay shaking” means that ping6 delay is between 0.05ms and 0.1ms most of
> the time. A few
“Delay shaking” means that ping6 delay is between 0.05ms and 0.1ms most of the
time. A few minutes later, ping6 delay suddenly bigger than 0.3ms, and after
one or two packets, ping6 delay is between 0.05ms and 0.1ms again. The time
interval of ping6 delay suddenly increase has no rules.
You should not need to match on both labels to pop a single label.
If you use ofproto/trace for this packet (see ovs-vswitchd(8)), what
does it say?
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 08:34:38AM -0400, Thomas Crowley wrote:
> I am attempting to pop the outer MPLS label on a packet that has two MPLS
>
What is "delay shaking"?
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:52:25PM +, sunquanying wrote:
> Hello:
>
> We have a problem of occasionally delay shaking at IPv6 when add the
> following flow:
>
> ovs-ofctl add-flow ply1-1-0
>
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 08:34:39PM +0800, 贾乘 wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This is my bridge configuration:
>
> Bridge br-int
> Controller "tcp:127.0.0.1:6653"
> is_connected: true
> fail_mode: secure
> Port br-int
> Interface br-int
>
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 12:28:31AM +0530, Numan Siddique wrote:
> On my Fedora 29 when ever I run all the ovs tests with "-j5", I see few
> core dumps generated for ovsdb-server and python2.
There are a couple of tests that intentionally do "kill -SEGV", to test
that things work properly in that
Hi,
On my Fedora 29 when ever I run all the ovs tests with "-j5", I see few
core dumps generated for ovsdb-server and python2.
Here's the back trace
[root@nusiddiq ovsdb]# gdb ./ovsdb-server
/opt/core_dumps/core.ovsdb-server.24604
GNU gdb (GDB) Fedora 8.2-6.fc29
...
...
Core was
Sounds like a great plan, Ben! Thanks for that. It'd be great if
people could chime in this thread to help identify those gaps.
As about the anecdotes, we had just been involved in a case where OVN
was used and packets were dropped at conntrack:
Two VMs on different Logical Switches (externally
Hi
What I know is EMC need more memory space. EMC has 8k entries by default, this
memory can store 1000K SMC entries. EMC should perform better with the same
cache entries, but SMC is better with the same memory space.
Best Regards,
Wei Yanqin
-Original Message-
From: txfh2007
Sent:
Hi Yanqin && all:
I have studied this ppt && vedio, and tried in my own environment. The
result is in 100K mac-ip PVP test scenario, when EM_FLOW_HASH_SHIFT == 17(emc
entry num is 130K+), the performance can still maintain(a little decline than
10K mac-ip scenario). My formal conclusion is
12 matches
Mail list logo
