On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:17:30AM -0700, Han Zhou wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Russell Bryant <russ...@ovn.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Mickey Spiegel <emspi...@us.ibm.com> > wrote: > > Yes, that's right. I was just assuming that the common case was not > having > > having that many networks, so that we still got a significant improvement. > > > > One option would be to skip trying to scope it for now and revisit if it > > becomes a bottleneck. > > > > Agree, it would be better not scope address set to lswitches.
I'm fine with postponing the idea of scoping address sets. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
