From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83AAB3CB35 for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:51:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B5E53897C; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:49:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 388AAFC9; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 12:51:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: cloneman cc: bloat In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.1.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Subject: Re: [Bloat] Windows 10 updates multhread limit Feature request to Microsoft X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2020 16:51:13 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain cloneman wrote: > I don't know if the Windows 10 updates multithreading problem is still > relevant for many users, but it certainly still affects me as user with > low bufferbloat, low latency, and only moderate bandwidth (50mbit , 4ms > idle, ~9ms loaded) > In any case, I have submitted official feedback to microsoft, as I've > exhausted any possible workarounds on my end short of implementing a > Windows update cache server on my LAN (go figure, apparently the cache > servers download with a small number of threads). I guess either because the person implementing the cache system didn't work as hard, or because they recognized they needed to do this in the "background" > After posting this link -- I'm done advocating for this issue. I think > valve steam has made some improvements, they still use many threads, but > somehow, it doesn't create as many issues.There seems to be no interest in > most discussion forums to explore this with any depth -- or even admit that > 20 connections to 1-2 servers is problematic. This is where some of the desire to have a "worse than best effort" queue came from :-) > Feedback hub link > https://aka.ms/AA7zg1r Not a public link, I think. What's sad is that Windows 2000 was the only implementation of the diffedge that we needed to make end-system driven QoS work, and then they abandonned it. -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAl6A0f8ACgkQgItw+93Q 3WX7RggAgAZu6v9O174A4v5VwAPMS3HP+HhETmMCGqUlnT3M7ZZjQx+gEg6qRori /ZYMl/W3TP2JsLimx3bmoHpVf7I1TC25EnVUo+24Z19Z1w/9T28LanMKAGrEeFVJ o9/c98kUPejF4/M/3XKBi7i3umD+rBzA/dihB3UyMEf4Sn3LbZld6lz6p/MFWn5I anfNjlJ/v9Sg4lBnkoRXPA1E22bkwAmmVpZxWSO/Vkk8fLA2ziJcijzTdtiH5+iw AU0e2S+eRAADY0o0ylR+2RMI3fg+x/+ame1/r6Q2rz5X8C3uaI1wNXdfb0kCpuxK UOgxYlYBgIEa/Kdsl6UJo7ONt5csdg== =X6Dq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--