From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Denys Fedoryschenko Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH] net: fast consecutive name allocation Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:55:14 +0200 Message-ID: <200911150355.15204.denys@visp.net.lb> References: <20091113233504.GQ19478@kvack.org> <20091113.185937.251557071.davem@davemloft.net> <20091115090604.331d75c2@opy.nosense.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , bcrl@lhnet.ca, shemminger@vyatta.com, opurdila@ixiacom.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Smith Return-path: Received: from hosting.visp.net.lb ([194.146.153.11]:59686 "EHLO hosting.visp.net.lb" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751617AbZKOBxs (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Nov 2009 20:53:48 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20091115090604.331d75c2@opy.nosense.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sunday 15 November 2009 00:36:04 Mark Smith wrote: > On the occasions I've looked at whether a Linux box would be an > alternative to the Cisco BRAS platform we use, the last time I looked > the number of sessions people were saying they were running was > 500. I don't consider Linux to be feasible in that role until you're > able to run at least 5000 sessions on a single box. I'm a bit unusual I am running up to 3500 on single NAS, but there is only 3 biggest one like this, and i am limited only by subscribers on this location (network is distributed over the country, and i have around 200 NAS servers running in summary). And it is just PC bought from nearest supermarket with cheap PCI RTL8169, and similar quality LOM adapter e1000e. Everything running on cheapest USB flash from same supermarket. For my case running Linux NAS on cheap PC's is only choice. It is 3rd world country, and many reasons (i can explain each, but it is not technical subject) doesn't let me to think, that "professional" equipment is feasible for me. Here people build networks on cheapest unmanageable switches, same cost/quality 802.11b/g wireless networks, and only a way to terminate them reliably is PPPoE. I know, it is also weak and easy to break, but it is single choice i have. I know also ISP's in Russia, who have somehow partially "managed" networks, but PPPoE letting them to drop running costs. And interface creation speed is important for me, when electricity goes down here, many customers disconnects (up to 500 on single NAS), and then join again to NAS. Load average was jumping to sky on such situations, just option to not create sysfs entries helped me a lot (was posted recently). Electricity outage is usual here, happens 2-3 times daily.