The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2003-Jun> msg00075



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

prequeal to WG lat call om the LSR mib module[mplsInSegmentTable]

  • From: "Adrian Farrel" <afarrel@movaz.com>
  • Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 13:48:09 -0400
  • Cc: "'mpls@uu.net'" <mpls@UU.NET>

>   In our experience the getnext performance is
> beyond slow. In some cases the response to the
> first getnext doesn't return even after several
> minutes (with the CPU at 100%).

That is quite a few instructions (even on an 8086 clocked at 4 MHz :-)
Sounds to me like it might be a bug.

> My understanding
> from following parts of this discussion was that
> the poor performance was due to the indexing mechanism
> in previous versions of the LSR MIB.

Bad indexing can certainly make things worse.

> So I'm in favor of "something" which
> would make the reading feasible in our situation. Draft 10 proposed an
> approach to improving this so I'm interested.
> I can't personally comment on the comparison to ATM...

Adrian