Or, you know, you could just run one tor daemon per core as has been suggested.
Thanks for your understanding and your patience with us while we work on this and a couple other slightly difficult and pressing engineering problems. Christian Dietrich: > I've got arround 200 mbits with an Intel Xeon E3-1230v2 (not over > 30% total cpu usage - 1 core at ~100%). > Pretty slow for an dedicated gigabit connection, due to this fact > i've killed my nodes. > The ticket for this "problem" is still not solved, after 3 1/2 years. :[ > > quote from the ticket(would sign that): > > May I suggest to get this at critical priority? > 21th century crypto software can't afford to be not fully-threaded ;) > No CPU sold today is mono-core anymore, and I sure few people would > run a tor dedicated relay up 24/24 to see it used at only 1/n'th of > its capacity. > > >On Jan 24, 2014, at 10:49 , Alexander Dietrich wrote: > > > >>Hello, > >> > >>a relay I'm running is currently at about 0.80 load average. It has a > >>dual-core CPU and I have configured "NumCPUs 2". I'm still in the process > >>of finding the bandwidth limit. > >> > >>Should I keep increasing "RelayBandwidthRate" on the single Tor process, or > >>is it a better idea to start a second process? > >In my experience, CPU load does not depend much on the amount of traffic, > >but much more on the number of connections/handshakes. > >_______________________________________________ > >tor-relays mailing list > >[email protected] > >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays -- Mike Perry
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
