On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 02:57:22PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> 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? I was fishing for an response from Mark. I'll resubmit it properly as that doesn't seem to be forthcoming. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
