Re: max rdomain limit 255

Yes, but presumably then 255 routing tables with 1.5M routes each is also a relatively big deal. Perhaps some additional limit could be set to avoid such issues and allow a larger number of relatively simple rdomains with a handful of routes. Either way I take the 255 limit as the true and tested safe default.

Thank you both for your insight.


Jun 9, 2026, 14:12 by [email protected]:

> On Tue, Jun 09, 2026 at 01:05:04PM +0200, ptr wrote:
>
>> OK understand. Is a hypothetical 1023 still considered too large for this? 
>>
>
> 1023 routing tables with 5 route each, no big deal.
> 1023 routing tables with 1.5 Mio routes each on the other hand is quite a
> big deal.
>
> So there is no answer to this question.
>
>> Jun 9, 2026, 13:08 by [email protected]:
>>
>> > On 2026-06-09, ptr <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> OK, thanks for the clarification.
>> >>
>> >> In my case rdomain IDs are sequentially generated and allocated, so this would be less of an issue with memory pressure. I believe the 255 limit could be on the low end if a larger fleet of nodes is factored in and say each tenant's identical rdomain IDs must potentially exist on every node.
>> >>
>> >
>> > besides memory use, some operations use sequential scans of the various
>> > rtables present on the system (i.e. at least one per rdomain), and won't
>> > scale well with a larger number.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
> -- 
> :wq Claudio
>