Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 13:23:40 -0700 (PDT) From: stheg olloydson <stheg_olloydson@yahoo.com> To: questions@freebsd.org Cc: tm4525@aol.com Subject: Re: Device polling performance Message-ID: <20040925202340.47348.qmail@web53906.mail.yahoo.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
it was said by tm4525@aol.com <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, its about the same with >interrupt enabled. > >The POINT is that since there is no way to measure the performance, >you've got a bunch of guys who think they've figured something out >touting device-polling without having a clue what the performance >advantages (or consequences) are, so it might as well be black magic, >or snake oil, since you are as blind as a bat in your assessments. Hello, Please post your "polling stats and userland benchmarking" results. I would be very interested seeing them as I was thinking of moving to NICs that would benefit from polling. However, because you have "EVIDENCE ... to the contrary", I may hold off. On the other hand, you do go on to say "there is no way to measure the performance" and "you are as blind as a bat in your assessments", so also please post your test methodology. I need to make my decision on reliable, repeatable facts. Also, when you post, would you please wrap your lines to a shorter length? Not everyone on the list uses AOL Reader, like you. Regards, Stheg __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040925202340.47348.qmail>