Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 00:45:26 +1100 (EDT) From: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au> To: davem@jenolan.rutgers.edu (David S. Miller) Cc: avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au, mingo@pc5829.hil.siemens.at, wong@rogerswave.ca, alan@cymru.net, imb@scgt.oz.au, dg@root.com, netdev@roxanne.nuclecu.unam.mx, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ok, final sockhash changes, new diff Message-ID: <199703051348.FAA18273@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <199703051328.IAA14097@jenolan.caipgeneral> from "David S. Miller" at Mar 5, 97 08:28:06 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In some mail from David S. Miller, sie said: > > From: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au> > Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 00:24:04 +1100 (EDT) > > > [the hash table should be kept compressed to avoid cache pollution] > > Why can't it "autoconfigure" according to the size of your RAM ? > > i.e. more RAM => bigger server => more users/network connections > > Extra silly cycles in the critical code path. Yes, if you were doing it all the time to make sure the table was a good size, but I was referring to doing it once - at boot. (I should ahve made myself more clear).
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703051348.FAA18273>