Polling For 100 mbps Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd ThemeSong)

[Danial Thom]

--- Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at toybox.placo.com>
wrote:

> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org]On
> Behalf Of Danial Thom
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 11:08 AM
> >To: Cezar Fistik;
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> >Subject: Re: Re[2]: Polling For 100 mbps
> Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd
> >ThemeSong)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--- Cezar Fistik <cezar at arax.md> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >> 
> >> Just a remark. I'm using an "Intel PRO/1000
> MT
> >> Dual Port Gigabit Copper
> >> CAT5 Server PCI express Adapter" in a box
> >> serving as router. Pumping 150Mbps
> >> through it with 99% idle CPU and 1%
> interrupts,
> >> polling enabled. It's
> >> a litle bit expensive, but it does its job
> >> perfectly.
> >> 
> >
> >If you read my last post about polling with
> intel
> >cards, you're realize just how foolish your
> >analysis is.
> >
> 
> Maybe he tried pumping the 150Mbps with polling
> turned
> off and the CPU utilization skyrocketed?
> 
> Ted

Or maybe FreeBSD just sucks wind? I promise you
that no machine known to man can pass 150Mb/s and
be 99% idle. Get a god-damned clue for pete's
sake. All polling does is screw up accounting so
the timings are wrong. At best there's a marginal
difference in performance. You still have to
process the packets.

Lets see, this "Test" would mean that his box
could handle 100 x 150Mb/s, or 15Gb/s. Thats
quite a little router you have there! lol.

DT

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com