Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 14:22:24 +0100 From: Stanislaw Halik <weirdo@tehran.lain.pl> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: packet drop with intel gigabit / marwell gigabit Message-ID: <20060319132224.GA57147@tehran.lain.pl> In-Reply-To: <000401c64a91$c3962c30$0201a8c0@oxy> References: <000a01c64a81$45eb6850$0201a8c0@oxy> <441BFF26.90807@mac.com> <000e01c64a8f$1b2bec80$0201a8c0@oxy> <000401c64a91$c3962c30$0201a8c0@oxy>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--G4iJoqBmSsgzjUCe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Mar 18, 2006, OxY wrote: > i increased hz from 2000 to 5000, now the packet loss is decreased > from 5-6% to 0.6-0,8% !!! > huge improve! > should i increase hz more? won't increasing HZ over 1000 break TCP support? from <20051216134759.795206f3.dokas@oitsec.umn.edu> on freebsd-pf@: #v+ > So it's not that far off, the server seems to increment timestamps at > 0.5 ms per tick (2 kHz), instead of the RFC mandated 1 ms (1 kHz). [...] Bingo (I think). I found the following in the firewall's kernel config: =20 options HZ=3D2000 #v- regards, --=20 w. --G4iJoqBmSsgzjUCe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEHVsQadU+vjT62TERArLqAJsGL82w09FgGuBBusLj8F9GayqhYQCfXXP+ mXWt0ua0UKlN+kDByCvF9+I= =fBGq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --G4iJoqBmSsgzjUCe--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060319132224.GA57147>