From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271834AbTGYAHx (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:07:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271835AbTGYAHw (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:07:52 -0400 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:17861 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271834AbTGYAHq (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:07:46 -0400 From: Bernd Eckenfels To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Net device byte statistics In-Reply-To: <200307250156.47108.fredrik@dolda2000.cjb.net> X-Newsgroups: ka.lists.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.5.19-20030610 ("Darts") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.20-xfs (i686)) Message-Id: Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 02:22:51 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article <200307250156.47108.fredrik@dolda2000.cjb.net> you wrote: > On the other hand, I cannot imagine that noone would have thought of it. What > is the reason for this? Is there another interface that I should use instead > of /proc/net/dev to gather byte statistics for interfaces? it is for performance reasons. You can a) collect your numbers more often and asume wrap/reboot if numbers decrease b) use iptables counters instead BTW: it is a very often discussed topic, personally (as net tools maintainer) I would love to see 64bit counters here, but this still means you have to sample often enough, so you do not lose numbers on crash. Greetings Bernd -- eckes privat - http://www.eckes.org/ Project Freefire - http://www.freefire.org/