In the last episode (May 29), Gary Stanley said:
> We have a webserver setup with 1 Intel Pro/1000 Gigabit Ethernet
> card. The old server was using around 95mbit/s of traffic or so
> (sustained rate). We decided to replace that card/machine with
> something that could handle the high network load. The question would
> be, What's a good size for NMBCLUSTERS? I want to be -sure- the box
> does not run out of mbufs during the production phase. The old
> machine was on a fxp0 driver, mbufs set to 65k due to network
> overhead. Are there limits to mbufs, as in a size limit?
mbufs are more related to the number of active sockets and the window
size than total throughput. I've got two boxes with gigabit NICs that
do up to 40MBytes/sec but have never peaked above 3k mbufs, since the
traffic is over maybe 10 sockets. If you have lots of connections, you
might want to shrink your window size to compensate. Assuming you're
sending lots of data to clients whose individual throughput is much
less than yours, dropping your send window to 16k (from 32k) and your
receive window to 8k (from 64k) will cut your mbuf usage to 1/4 its
previous value. 64k mbufs is probably too high, actually. The
tuning(7) manpage goes into a bit more detail.
If you are still having problems, try the -net mailinglist.
--
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
