netdev - Re: [PATCH] IPVS: Allow boot time change of hash size.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4B41F3C2.6050006@trash.net>
Date:	Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:57:22 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
CC:	Mark Bergsma <mark@...imedia.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Catalin(ux) M. BOIE" <catab@...edromix.ro>,
	Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@...d.net>,
	Graeme Fowler <graeme@...emef.net>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPVS: Allow boot time change of hash size.

Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 07:49:38PM +0100, Mark Bergsma wrote:
>> On 03-12-08 01:37, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: "Catalin(ux) M. BOIE" <catab@...edromix.ro>
>>> Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 16:16:04 -0700 (MST)
>>>> I was looking for anything that could get me past of 88.000 request per
>>>> seconds.
>>>> The help text told me to raise that value if I have big number of
>>>> connections. I just needed an easy way to test.
>>> You're just repeating what I said, you "think" it should be
>>> changed and as a result you are wasting everyones time.
>>>
>>> You don't actually "know", you're just guessing using random
>>> snippets from documentation rather than good hard evidence of
>>> a need.
>> Hello,
>>
>> I just found this year-old thread about a patch allowing the IPVS
>> connection hash table size to be set at load time by a module parameter.
>> Apparently the conclusion reached was that allowing this configuration
>> setting to be changed would be useless, and that the poster's
>> performance problems would likely lie elsewhere, since he had no
>> evidence it was caused by the hash table size.
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> thanks for your test results. I have added them to the patch.
> Feel free to edit the text.

Just wondering because of this comment - do you want me to apply this
patch?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html