In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill Paul
writes:
> The xl driver never holds more than 128 mbuf clusters in the receive ring.
> Whenever a new packet comes in, it sends one of the mbufs out and replaces
> it with a new one. IT DOESN'T HOLD ONTO THEM. It will however complain if
> it can't alloca
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, David Greenman wrote:
...
:Perhaps I should have spoken up earlier, but none of these reports has
: indicated a problem. The "92%" above is the percent of buffers that have been
: allocated and are currently in-use. The system
>"Kuriyama, Kent K Mr (CPF N651KK)" wrote:
>>
>> Chris,
>>
>> Your email prompted me to look at mbuf utilization on a 4.1.1-STABLE box
>> that is currently not in production.
>>
>> outside# netstat -m
>> 130/160/7168 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
>> 129 mbufs allocated to data
>>
"Kuriyama, Kent K Mr (CPF N651KK)" wrote:
>
> Chris,
>
> Your email prompted me to look at mbuf utilization on a 4.1.1-STABLE box
> that is currently not in production.
>
> outside# netstat -m
> 130/160/7168 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
> 129 mbufs allocated to data
> 1 mbuf
On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Matt Heckaman wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I thought I would through this into the mix:
>
> Server, NOT in production yet: 4.1.1-RELEASE:
>
> matt[beta]:~> uptime;netstat -m
> 10:40AM up 16 days, 1:42, 2 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I thought I would through this into the mix:
Server, NOT in production yet: 4.1.1-RELEASE:
matt[beta]:~> uptime;netstat -m
10:40AM up 16 days, 1:42, 2 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
132/352/131072 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
1
Chris,
Your email prompted me to look at mbuf utilization on a 4.1.1-STABLE box
that is currently not in production.
outside# netstat -m
130/160/7168 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
129 mbufs allocated to data
1 mbufs allocated to packet headers
128/136/1792 mbuf clusters in use
