Re: Patches solving the same issue!?

[Thomas Jacob <jacob@internet24.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2154 bytes --]

As addendum, your code runs just as fast, maybe
even a tad faster as mine, and obviously uses
less memory. Oh well...

On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 11:47:36PM +0200, Thomas Jacob wrote:
> Oops, sorry about that, I did notice your initial
> set of speed up patches (that's why I was enthusiastically playing
> around with large rule sets and became aware of the issue
> in the first place), but evidently I didn't follow the
> related thread very closely.
> 
> I am not familiar enough with the iptables code to decide
> whether or not chains are always sorted by name in the kernel,
> and thus will be sorted if you read them back, but if that's
> the case, of course your method is better, as long as that's
> always the case...
> 
> To be honest, I didn't really understand the chain_index code ;)
> 
>    
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 10:57:31PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > 
> > I can see from the list that Thomas Jacob <jacob@internet24.de>, and I
> > have just posted patches solving the same issue.
> > 
> > I promised Patrick that I would work on this issue, and I did.
> > 
> > Its running on our production servers, and I planned to release the
> > patch today as it has proven stable on production.  I guess Thomas was
> > just slightly faster than me ;-)
> > 
> > It was actually already released in the CPAN module IPTables::libiptc
> > (ver.0.08 released 2008-06-16).
> > 
> > 
> > We both use binary search, but with two slightly different approaches.
> > 
> > - My patch uses the existing data structure, and the existing
> >   algorithm for binary searching.
> > 
> > - Thomas builds a new data structure and implements a new binary
> >   search algorithm.
> > 
> > I must give Thomas that this binary search algo (taken from wikipedia)
> > is much more compact than the existing one.
> > 
> > Guess I cannot judge what patch is the best, as I'm biased...
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]