Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:42:00 +0200 From: Cezar Fistik <cezar@arax.md> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re[4]: Polling For 100 mbps Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd ThemeSong) Message-ID: <1808066969.20051214224200@arax.md> In-Reply-To: <20051214184906.4598.qmail@web33309.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNEEAIFDAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> <20051214184906.4598.qmail@web33309.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello all, > Or maybe FreeBSD just sucks wind? I promise you > that no machine known to man can pass 150Mb/s and > be 99% idle. Get a god-damned clue for pete's > sake. All polling does is screw up accounting so > the timings are wrong. At best there's a marginal > difference in performance. You still have to > process the packets. > Lets see, this "Test" would mean that his box > could handle 100 x 150Mb/s, or 15Gb/s. Thats > quite a little router you have there! lol. I have to recognize that I didn't follow the thread very carefuly and I propbably missed some posts. I just wanted to say that when using freebsd as a pure router using intel cards, polling realy helps. I've noticed 10-20% CPU utilization decrease with polling enabled. Second, I didn't mean 150Megabytes/sec, rather Megabits/sec. Third the actual CPU load is ranging from 0-4% (according to top), but with an average of 1%. And finally I just did a test and enabled polling on that box. The CPU idle state immediately dropped to 88% while interrupts increased to 10-12%. P.S Danial, have a look at this http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/M/Mbps.html -- Best regards, Cezar mailto:cezar@arax.md
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1808066969.20051214224200>