From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 01:11:39 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: [PATCH] MM : alloc_large_system_hash() can free some memory for non power-of-two bucketsize Message-ID: <20070521081139.GG19966@holomorphy.com> References: <20070518115454.d3e32f4d.dada1@cosmosbay.com> <20070519182123.GD19966@holomorphy.com> <464F44BD.3040209@cosmosbay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <464F44BD.3040209@cosmosbay.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Eric Dumazet Cc: Andrew Morton , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , linux kernel , David Miller List-ID: William Lee Irwin III a ?crit : >> The proper way to do this is to convert the large system hashtable >> users to use some data structure / algorithm other than hashing by >> separate chaining. On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 08:41:01PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > No thanks. This was already discussed to death on netdev. To date, hash > tables are a good compromise. > I dont mind losing part of memory, I prefer to keep good performance when > handling 1.000.000 or more tcp sessions. The data structures perform well enough, but I suppose it's not worth pushing the issue this way. -- wli -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org