Pete Heist <[email protected]> writes: >> On Apr 25, 2018, at 10:28 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hmm, actually it looks like just compiling against the conntrack code >> adds a module dependency on conntrack. And as far as I can tell, the >> code doesn't initiate any new conntrack state if it doesn't already >> exist. So I think it's safe to turn on NAT mode by default. Will add >> that :) > > nat vs nonat CPU load for flent’s rrul_be / "cpu_stats_localhost::load" on > APU2: > > <limit> <nonat avg cpu load> <nat avg cpu load> > 10mbit 0.07 0.07 > 20mbit 0.09 0.09 > 30mbit 0.10 0.10 > 40mbit 0.11 0.11 > 50mbit 0.13 0.13 > 100mbit 0.19 0.20 > 150mbit 0.27 0.28 > 200mbit 0.33 0.35 > 250mbit 0.39 0.41 > 300mbit 0.44 0.45 > 350mbit 0.47 0.47 > 400mbit 0.50 0.49 > 450mbit 0.50 0.51 > 500mbit 0.53 0.52 > none 0.37 0.43 (1864 mbit total up/down) > > It looks like the largest impact is when there’s no rate limiting, > probably when higher packet rates are reached and the relative > proportion of CPU taken is greater. I suppose the backwards results > (where nonat takes more CPU than nat) at 400mbit and 500mbit are just > outliers. This isn’t a perfect way to measure. > > I’ll leave it to you what to do with this information. Rough > estimation: nat may be +2% CPU with rate limiting, and +15% without…
Huh, that is maybe a bit much for a default; I guess it's better to just set the NAT flag as needed from sqm-scripts, then... -Toke _______________________________________________ Cake mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
