From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailgw1.uni-kl.de (mailgw1.uni-kl.de [IPv6:2001:638:208:120::220]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 063A43B2A4 for ; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 06:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de (sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de [IPv6:2001:638:208:ef34:0:ff:fe00:65]) by mailgw1.uni-kl.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id 17LAN0LH137095 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 21 Aug 2021 12:23:00 +0200 Received: from sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de (ip6-localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id 17LAN0Kf007428 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 21 Aug 2021 12:23:00 +0200 Received: (from auerswal@localhost) by sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id 17LAN00H007427; Sat, 21 Aug 2021 12:23:00 +0200 Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 12:23:00 +0200 From: Erik Auerswald To: Dave Collier-Brown Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Message-ID: <20210821102300.GA3708@unix-ag.uni-kl.de> References: <20210815133922.GA18118@unix-ag.uni-kl.de> <20210819071734.GA3936@unix-ag.uni-kl.de> <80e0a336-06e4-c6b6-a01b-f849296086a6@indexexchange.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <80e0a336-06e4-c6b6-a01b-f849296086a6@indexexchange.com> Author: Erik Auerswald User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.999, tests=ALL_TRUSTED=-1,URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 X-Spam-Score: (-0.999) X-Spam-Flag: NO Subject: Re: [Bloat] Sidebar re illustrating quality (was: New Version Notification for draft-cpaasch-ippm-responsiveness-00.txt) 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: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 10:23:10 -0000 Hi, On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 01:50:01PM -0400, Dave Collier-Brown wrote: > > I can't actually draw a picture of it here, but there's a good way to > show multiple limiting factor graphically. One is with a bucket, > http://www.imthird.org/the-limiting-factor-concept, but for comparisons > I like a simpler one > > For an example, imagine a large letter "Y" with the stem labelled > "throughput", one arm labelled "latency" and the other "RPM". There's a > dotted-line circle drawn over it so that the two arms touch the circle, > and the stem sticks out through it. Those both have the problem that both throughput and RPM are "the higher the better", while latency is "the lower the better." Perhaps the idea of a "score" (e.g., A through F) assigned to each individual metric that is then combined to produce an "overall score" is not that bad? It is not perfect, it hides details, and it cannot please everyone, but might be useful. (I personally always want to see the base values and the method to comupte both the individual and the overall score, so I can assess the applicability of the score to my requirements.) Thanks, Erik -- It's impossible to learn very much by simply sitting in a lecture, or even by simply doing problems that are assigned. -- Richard P. Feynman