Microsoft KB Archive/104510

From BetaArchive Wiki
< Microsoft KB Archive
Revision as of 15:03, 18 July 2020 by 3155ffGd (talk | contribs) (importing KB archive)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Knowledge Base

Two NCBs per Session Based on Need Declining as Traffic Climbs

Article ID: 104510

Article Last Modified on 10/31/2006

This article was previously published under Q104510


The recommended ratio of two network control blocks (NCBs) per session seems to contradict the fact that an NCB setting of 254 is suggested when there are 128 or more sessions.

An extra NCB per session is generally recommended because at any one time there can be at least one asynchronous NCB posted per session, and it can be useful to have another NCB available. For example, a second NCB can be used for raw I/O, where an asynchronous RECEIVE is posted on the session then a SEND is issued on the same session while the RECEIVE is pending. In addition to cases of this sort, the system also requires overhead NCBs such as the auxiliary RECEIVE_ANY and the RECEIVE_DATAGRAMS that are always pending for computername, domain, otherdomains, and so on.

But as the number of active sessions increases, the likelihood that there will actually be a pending asynchronous NCB posted on every session decreases radically, which means that the likelihood of two pending NCBs per session decreases even more. In short: when there are lots of sessions, the need for an extra NCB per session decreases sharply.

The recommended ratio of two NCBs/session (not three or more) takes into account that the redirector and server utilize the interface in such a way that it's unlikely that more than two NCBs will ever be pending on a single session.

Additional query words: 2.00 2.0 2.10 2.1 2.10a 2.1a 2.20 2.2

Keywords: KB104510