Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:55:49 +0100
From:      Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: option HZ=?
Message-ID:  <fnq359$gjc$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080130140711.GA19047@epia-2.farid-hajji.net>
References:  <47A073C2.1060209@moneybookers.com> <20080130140711.GA19047@epia-2.farid-hajji.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
cpghost wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 02:55:30PM +0200, Stefan Lambrev wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I want to know what is the bad effect of increasing HZ too much?
>> And when is too much? What problems can I expect when HZ>2000?
>> Can I change this value without pre-compiling the kernel?
> 
> You can change HZ by adding a line to /boot/loader.conf like this:
> 
> kern.hz="100"
> 
> (it works on RELENG_6 and RELENG_7 and I'm using this conservative
> setting on all my boxes, since I don't need faster context switching)
> 
> If you set HZ too high, the kernel will spend too much overhead
> on unnecessary context switching, and it may even reach a point
> (with very high values of HZ) where interrupt service routines
> get interrupted way too often by clock ticks; i.e. interrupts
> would eventually come in faster than the kernel can service them.

Isn't there also something bad about TCP timestamp overflow?




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fnq359$gjc$1>