<snip> > > Here's an example of where disabling the flowtable solved a user's > problem in October 2010: > > http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=18301 >
<snip> > > Additionally I remember 2 or 3 posts to mailing lists here discussing > how bgpd was taking up 100% CPU (or specifically an entire CPU core). > I'm not sure what people did to solve that problem, but one has to > wonder if flowtable was the cause and they simply didn't realise it. > The context of the discussion was Andrey's original email, in which he reported multiple issues that include the em driver, routing daemons, flow-table garbage collector taking 100% CPU etc. The last issue obviously relates to the flow-table code, and I was not disputing about that. I simply asked for a clarification, which I did not receive a clear answer, on whether there are routing issues when flow-table is disabled. The reason why I asked, is because L2/L3 separation work (poorly named, of course) is more about the routing infrastructure changes in the FBSD 8.0 kernel, whereas the flow-table enhancements deal more with the connections (as detailed in my last email), and it builds on top of the L2/L3 work. <snip> > > I can't speak for the OP or his situation -- flowtable appears to "work > fine for me", but then again none of our RELENG_8 systems do routing nor > handle large numbers of routes (very simple single-IP or multi-IP > systems on two networks). > See above paragraph ... I am going to change the flow-table default setting to "disabled" for the upcoming 8.2 release while these issues are being resolved, and the documentation is being put in place. Sounds reasonable. -- Qing _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"