Le vendredi 21 mai 2010 à 07:43 +0800, Changli Gao a écrit : > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:44 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Do you have an idea of the depth of a rb tree with 1 million entries ? > > > > Well sized hash table is about 25 x faster than a rb tree in this case > > for pure lookups, and inserts and deletes in hash table are about 100x > > faster in this case. > > > > hash table : one or two cache misses per lookup or inserts/deletes > > > > rbtree with one million entries : about 25 caches misses per lookup, and > > maybe 100 cache misses per insert/delete. > > > > > > and we have to do insertion and deletion in serial with rbtree, so > rbtree doesn't scales as well as hash tables for parallel processing, > if there are many insertions and deletions operations. > > Before saying such things, you should read the source code Changli, because you only propagate wrong information. conntrack uses a single lock, so inserts and deletes _are_ serialized, _even_ with hash table. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
