Scott Long wrote: > |-------------------+---------------+--------------+---------------------| > | | | | As part of the | > | | | | MPSAFE network | > | | | | stack work, | > | | | | delivery of routing | > | | | | socket messages was | > | | | | moved to queued | > | | | | dispatch via netisr | > | | | | rather than direct | > | | | | dispatch from the | > | | | | routing code. | > | Increased and | | | However, the risks | > | configurable | | Robert | of lost routing | > | netisr queue max | Needs testing | Watson | messages for | > | depth for routing | | | routing daemons are | > | sockets | | | high; respond by | > | | | | increasing the max | > | | | | depth beyond a | > | | | | default interface | > | | | | max depth of 50 to | > | | | | 128, and allow it | > | | | | to be | > | | | | user-configured. | > | | | | This change is now | > | | | | present in CVS HEAD | > | | | | and RELENG_5. | > |-------------------+---------------+--------------+---------------------| You can kill this one. The route(4) man page documents since ages that under memory shortage conditions route messages can get lost. -- AndreReceived on Fri Sep 17 2004 - 10:33:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:12 UTC