[didier <dgautheron@xxxxxxxx>]

ronnie sahlberg wrote:
> Another unrelated performance issue i belive is there, but have not
> collected hard data for yet it that i suspect that the ghashtable
> routines are slow for how we use them.
> I do see a huge slowdown in filtering when hashtable intensive
> functions such as TCP analysis is used and there is a massive numnber
> of different tcp sessions in the trace.
I don't fully understand the code but do we really need the 
tcp_rel_seq_chunk hash for relative sequence?
That's a hash node +data per TCP packet (at least 24 bytes).
The data is also saved in the TCP conversation.

I have code running which remove it whitout ill effect, as far as I can 
tell that is.
Didier