[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Ideas on increasing the significance of tor

To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Ideas on increasing the significance of tor
From: Olaf Selke <olaf.selke@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 12:19:43 +0200
Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Wed, 30 May 2007 06:19:51 -0400
In-reply-to: <1bd71ad80705291104j4b77b34fxc1f07cb648e29b2a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <005601c7a122$4ee61510$4201a8c0@ROCKET> <1bd71ad80705291104j4b77b34fxc1f07cb648e29b2a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221)

Michael_google gmail_Gersten wrote:
> 
> The best I can conclude, from limited observations, is that CPU
> overhead is critical.

yep, at about 4500 KB/s the cpu running the tor main thread is loaded
with 100%. The other three cpus are left almost idle.

Mrtg motoring of my box clearly shows what's going on with throughput
and cpu load. Thus I'm bothering this mailing list with more enhanced
multithread capabilities, taking better advantage from multiple cores.

regards, Olaf

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ideas on increasing the significance of tor
  - From: Michael Holstein

References:
- Ideas on increasing the significance of tor
  - From: Lukas Feiler
- Re: Ideas on increasing the significance of tor
  - From: Michael_google gmail_Gersten

Prev by Author: Re: Regulating bandwidth
Next by Author: Re: Ideas on increasing the significance of tor
Previous by thread: Re: Ideas on increasing the significance of tor
Next by thread: Re: Ideas on increasing the significance of tor
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread