DragonFly BSD
DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2005-02
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Top strangeness

From: EM1897@xxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 17:39:44 EST

In a message dated 2/10/2005 3:05:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, Matthew Dillon 
<dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>:Ok, well I decided to do a little more testing before I dismantled my 
>:What I found is that I get the following:
>:Network load = 15K pps:     System 5% Interrupt 9-12%
>:Network load = 34Kpps:      System 10% Interrupt 10-14%
>:(the interrupt number bounces around a bit)
>:Something doesn't seem right. Generally the load increases are linear for
>:this sort of test. The interrupt load seems about the same for what should
>:be twice the load. Even if no additional interrupts were generated I can't 
>:that the interrupt work could be that similar for double the load.
>    This sounds about right, actually.  The EM device is aggregating
>    packets and thus the interrupt code becomes more efficient at higher
>    loads.  It's also tight enough that it probably fits entirely in the 
>    L1 cache.

I find that difficult to fathom. If that were the case you should also see 
such efficiencies in FreeBSD and its typically pretty linear. Is there a
way to reset the counters in vmstat so that I can monitor the marginal
interrupt rate?

[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]