Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 27 Jun 2002 09:07:22 -0700
From:      Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
To:        Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
Cc:        Patrick Thomas <root@utility.clubscholarship.com>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: tune down recvspace for this ?
Message-ID:  <20020627160722.GK18877@elvis.mu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20020627071056.N67834-100000@patrocles.silby.com>
References:  <20020627030821.M68572-100000@utility.clubscholarship.com> <20020627071056.N67834-100000@patrocles.silby.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> [020627 05:10] wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Patrick Thomas wrote:
> 
> > 99/10208/34816 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
> >
> > Would changing net.inet.tcp.recvspace down to 32768 (default is 65536) be
> > a wise thing to do ?
> >
> > Or are there other better suggestions ?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > PT
> 
> Actually, you usually use most of your mbuf (clusters) for sending, not
> receiving.  Hence, sendspace is what you may wish to kick down in order to
> reduce usage.

True, but it looks like he could raise nmbclusters in his config intead
of throttling.

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org]
'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
 start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.'
Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020627160722.GK18877>