Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 2 Aug 2003 21:14:33 +0200 | From | Willy Tarreau <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4.22-pre10 |
| |
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 08:28:46PM +0200, Martin Josefsson wrote:
> Uhm, my tests have shown it to be very fast and efficient. But I didn't > look to see if all packets got through to the logfile. But getting it to > write logs at ~35MB/s wasn't a problem.
I clearly didn't reach these numbers, I used LOGEMU, and while you're at it, I must say that when I speak about 1500/s, it's about logs _written_ down. The firewall can still can process 5k sessions/s, but looses many logs (3.5k every second).
When I read the LOGEMU code, I had the impression that it was given more as a proof of concept than anything else. Because there are many many many "fprintf(of, something_trivial_enough_to_support_memcpy)".
> Did you specify --ulog-qthreshold 50 ? > and did you specify --ulog-cprange at all? if you don't it will copy the > entire packet to userspace. I copy 64 bytes to userspace and that's more > than enough to log everything needed.
honnestly, i't 6 months old in my head, and I don't remember with which parameters I played. But I'd happily restart a bench if you have some tuning advices (provided that they are compatible with basic production constraints, such as log rotation, and a few CPU left for monitoring processes :-)) I cannot promise to to it within a few days though.
Cheers, Willy
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |