From: Joubert Berger <joubertb@gmail.com>
To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: iptables-restore vs iptables-restore --noflush performance
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 15:13:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <63d3731e050725121353083b32@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Anyone know why I would get a big performance difference between
"iptables-restore" and "iptables-restore --noflush"?
I have 6600 rules. If I load with iptables-restore, it takes about 30sec.
If I use noflush, that turns in 1 min and 20+ seconds.
--joubert
next reply other threads:[~2005-07-25 19:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-25 19:13 Joubert Berger [this message]
2005-07-25 19:27 ` iptables-restore vs iptables-restore --noflush performance Steven M Campbell
2005-07-25 20:46 ` Joubert Berger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=63d3731e050725121353083b32@mail.gmail.com \
--to=joubertb@gmail.com \
--cc=joubert@berger-family.org \
--cc=netfilter@lists.netfilter.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.