From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evgeniy Polyakov Subject: Re: Extensible hashing and RCU Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:32:51 +0300 Message-ID: <20070313093248.GA14221@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <20070204074143.26312.qmail@science.horizon.com> <20070217131302.GA22732@2ka.mipt.ru> <20070302085246.GA30951@2ka.mipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Cc: linux@horizon.com, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: akepner@sgi.com Return-path: Received: from relay.2ka.mipt.ru ([194.85.82.65]:43220 "EHLO 2ka.mipt.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965656AbXCMJd1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 05:33:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070302085246.GA30951@2ka.mipt.ru> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 11:52:47AM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov (johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru) wrote: > So I get my words about tree/trie implementation instead of hash table > for socket lookup back. Hmm, I was a bit fast to draw a line, there are some possibilities to have faster than hash table lookup using different algorithms... So, I ask network developers about testing environment for socket lookup benchmarking. What would be the best test case to determine performance of the lookup algo? Is it enough to replace algo and locking and create say one million of connections and try to run trivial web server (that is what I'm going to test if there will not be any better suggestion, but I only have single-core athlon 64 with 1gb of ram as a test bed and two core duo machines as generators, probably I can use one of them as a test machine too. They have gigabit adapters and aree connected over gigabit switch)? -- Evgeniy Polyakov