On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 23:10 +0200, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
How many static routes do you have?
I have potentially a few hundred thousand routes - that can't be
summarised for various reasons and tend to change a lot. A situation
that the standard routing protocols were not designed to handle.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 04:15:31PM +0100, Neil Wilson wrote:
Hi all,
Loading a large set of prefixes into the static protocol is pretty
quick, but reconfiguring is really slow.
The current implementation uses linked lists which are traversed lots of
times during the reconfiguration.
Hi!
Yes, static protocol has time complexity O(n^2) for reconfiguration,
so reconfiguration is slow for thousands of routes.
FIB could be used and i will probably fix that in that way.
Either that, or just sort the lists.
Have a nice fortnight
--
Martin `MJ'
On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 13:24 +0200, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
Quick workaround would be split these routes to several static protocols
(for examle one per hundred routes).
Yep, that works like magic. Down to 2 seconds from six minutes!
Thanks
Neil
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 04:19:15PM +0100, Neil Wilson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 13:24 +0200, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:
Quick workaround would be split these routes to several static protocols
(for examle one per hundred routes).
Yep, that works like magic. Down to 2 seconds from six
Hi all,
Loading a large set of prefixes into the static protocol is pretty
quick, but reconfiguring is really slow.
The current implementation uses linked lists which are traversed lots of
times during the reconfiguration.
I was wondering if these could be indexed and sorted in some way with
