[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Scalability of Netconf

To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de
Subject: Re: Scalability of Netconf
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 18:15:24 +0200
Cc: netconf@ops.ietf.org, nmrg@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
Iim-sig: v:"1.1"; h:"imail.cisco.com"; d:"cisco.com"; z:"home"; m:"krs"; t:"1120666471.885867"; x:"432200"; a:"rsa-sha1"; b:"nofws:832"; e:"Iw=="; n:"sQYarK2E51MdcTiUqeif3F7cWdxIfoCiXhdfb9vD5ee/j0jXL15gbFxF2p" "XIweAblu0N6XAgK7k+wrbr7bQDJaCDqOmzqpRUBjIRQAXQ7NzadpmR3pUL6wxaRUtW+c43sl9jC" "50Qg1sXHpPjt8Y+Y16ioyQAQAdSunM4YhevURc="; s:"ffKYDfa9slkjVJMFm2ZDtUS99Uc7y0OMfXySNrgnL7iDUBx45h7hoaKakCWeh2rVfaRanx3S" "u6IRIWDqQ/G0W+/UYl+aRQm926F23i8Ny7z+AVkyqn3baNpxOlbarg7LGqApXhXi+Des29qz75v" "Yto2jFAPTfBDhckDLQun/zI0="; c:"Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 18:15:24 +0200"; c:"From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>"; c:"Subject: Re: Scalability of Netconf"
Iim-verify: s:"y"; v:"y"; r:"60"; h:"imail.cisco.com"; c:"message from imail.cisco.com verified; "
In-reply-to: <20050706152538.GA7841@boskop.local>
References: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B403FE42CF@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> <20050705140117.GA4704@boskop.local> <20050706152538.GA7841@boskop.local>
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317)

Yeah, I just had this funny thought of 1200 NMSes trying to configure a
router.  That's the sort of locking contention we certainly did NOT
optimize for!

Eliot


Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 04:01:17PM +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> 
> 
>>I am running this script on a 3GHz Pentium with 512 MB Ram (so really
>>nothing high end for a management system) running Linux 2.6.10. I 
>>keep 300 connections open and the funny thing is that this box does 
>>not at really get stressed by this. The load never went above 0.1% 
>>and was most of the time significantly below. The memory used excluding
>>buffers was ~235 MB.
> 
> 
> Today I was running 1200 ssh connections using the same basic script
> on the same box. The load again never went above 0.1 while the memory 
> usage went up to ~494 MB. Shall I try 10.000 tomorrow? With 2GB of
> memory this should be possible. The two Linux XEON servers that play 
> the remote end for 600 connections each do not seem to bother much 
> about all this.
> 
> /js
> 

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>

References:
- RE: Scalability of Netconf
  - From: "Sharon Chisholm" <schishol@nortel.com>
- Re: Scalability of Netconf
  - From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de>
- Re: Scalability of Netconf
  - From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de>

Prev by Date: Re: Scalability of Netconf
Next by Date: Re: nmrgScalability of Netconf
Previous by thread: Re: Scalability of Netconf
Next by thread: Re: Scalability of Netconf
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread