RE: Re: [lwip-users] Re: tx badnwidth

[Kieran Mansley]

On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 08:48 -0500, Bill Auerbach wrote:
> >The above two settings are much too small to expect decent throughput,
> >and almost certainly explain the poor performance in the 2048-byte-write
> >capture you sent.  You can probably get away with leaving TCP_WND alone
> >if you're acting purely as a sender of packets, but TCP_SND_BUF should
> >be as large as you can make it.
> 
> Kieran, can the PBUF_POOL_SIZE 6 also be a problem?

Yes, especially once the TCP_SND_BUF is made larger.

Kieran