From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Subject: Re: TCP throttling Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 01:44:40 -0300 Message-ID: <39e6f6c705091921441424a1fb@mail.gmail.com> References: <200509190646.57579.a1426z@gawab.com> <20050919112008.17ad14f5@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <200509200654.23703.a1426z@gawab.com> Reply-To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Stephen Hemminger , linux-net@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: Al Boldi In-Reply-To: <200509200654.23703.a1426z@gawab.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-net-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 9/20/05, Al Boldi wrote: > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > You probably need to increase the maximum socket buffer > > sizes. Linux defaults are conservative to avoid running > > servers out of memory. > > > > http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/tcptune/#Linux > > Thanks for the great link! It kept me up all night. > > I managed to crash the server running out of memory. Don't ask what numbers > I used, I just went overboard. I played with these numbers before, but > never imagined that their scale would be in the millions. > > Could you suggest sane values for 2.4/2.6 on a 100mbit link? Well, perhaps the sane, conservative values are the one already calculated by the kernel? Just add more memory to your machine and the sane values will go up accordingly? :-) - Arnaldo