RE: CHGTCPA TCPRCVBUF(262144) TCPSNDBUF(262144)

Back in 2005, IBM suggested we change from default of 8k to 64k for both.
Should we consider increasing these to 262k?

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Rob Berendt
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2020 3:59 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: CHGTCPA TCPRCVBUF(262144) TCPSNDBUF(262144)

On our performance audit it was noted that <snip> The tcp/ip buffers (TCPRCVBUF/TCPSNDBUF) are set to 262k. This is large for send/receive buffers. The general recommendation is 64K. If the network card is not able to accommodate this size, then it will reduce automatically to its highest capable size.
</snip>

I do have these set
TCP receive buffer size . . . . TCPRCVBUF > 262144
TCP send buffer size . . . . . . TCPSNDBUF > 262144
I'll be danged if I can remember why I have those set to that number. I've really got to start documenting these kind of changes...
Can anyone guess why I have it set to that size?

Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600 Mail to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link: https://amazon.midrange.com