Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 07:49:38PM +0100, Mark Bergsma wrote:
>> On 03-12-08 01:37, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: "Catalin(ux) M. BOIE" <catab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 16:16:04 -0700 (MST)
>>>> I was looking for anything that could get me past of 88.000 request per
>>>> The help text told me to raise that value if I have big number of
>>>> connections. I just needed an easy way to test.
>>> You're just repeating what I said, you "think" it should be
>>> changed and as a result you are wasting everyones time.
>>> You don't actually "know", you're just guessing using random
>>> snippets from documentation rather than good hard evidence of
>>> a need.
>> I just found this year-old thread about a patch allowing the IPVS
>> connection hash table size to be set at load time by a module parameter.
>> Apparently the conclusion reached was that allowing this configuration
>> setting to be changed would be useless, and that the poster's
>> performance problems would likely lie elsewhere, since he had no
>> evidence it was caused by the hash table size.
> Hi Mark,
> thanks for your test results. I have added them to the patch.
> Feel free to edit the text.
Just wondering because of this comment - do you want me to apply this
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html