[Devel] Re: [PATCH 4/9] network namespaces: socket hashes

[Daniel Lezcano]

Andrey Savochkin wrote:

> The main reason is that socket hash tables should be large enough to work
> efficiently, but it isn't good to waste a lot of memory for each namespace.
> Namespaces should be cheap enough, to allow to have hundreds of them.
> This reason of memory efficiency, of course, has a priority unless/until
> socket hash tables start to resize automatically.
> 
> Another point is that routing lookup is much more complicated than the
> socket's one to add another search key.
> Routing also have additional routines for deleting entries matching some
> patterns, and so on.
> In short, routing is much more complicated, and it already quite efficient
> for various sizes of routing tables.

That makes sense, thx for the explanation.

Cheers.
	-- Daniel.