* Federico Giannici <[email protected]> [2015-03-09 16:51]: > On 03/09/15 15:24, Henning Brauer wrote: > >* Federico Giannici <[email protected]> [2015-02-04 01:11]: > >>I have done an experiment: I replaced in every rule the "set queue XXX" with > >>"tag XXX" ("XXX" is always different so the PF optimizer doesn't collapse > >>multiple rules in tables). In this way we found that, leaving the some > >>amount of filter rules and only removing the queue, the CPU used in > >>interrupts decreased from about 55% to 15% (traffic was not full in that > >>moment). > >something is fishy here, since "queue foo" just tags, which > >coincidently is very much like "tag foo" - really almost identical > >codewise. > OK, but only for the rules evaluation. Then, in the case of queues, all the > bandwidths (maximum, granted, etc) must be evaluated. I think here is the > different and slow code.
huh. then there's sth pretty damn inefficient with a high # of queues. > >since you're running 5.5, I'll assume ALTQ and thus the problem being > >gone :) > Yes, 5.5 but using the new queues definition (not "oldqueue"). damn. that means it is something I should look into. > Are you saying that the queues code has been replaced AFTER 5.5? I'm really demonstrating that I often forget which release had what, 5.5 is already long ago... -- Henning Brauer, [email protected], [email protected] BS Web Services GmbH, http://bsws.de, Full-Service ISP Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS. Virtual & Dedicated Servers, Root to Fully Managed Henning Brauer Consulting, http://henningbrauer.com/
