Re: [Bloat] RE : DSLReports Speed Test has latency measurement built-in

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Steinar H. Gunderson
<sgunderson@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 03:26:27PM +0000, luca.muscariello@orange.com wrote:
>> BTW if a paced flow from Google shares a bloated buffer with a non paced
>> flow from a non Google server,  doesn't this turn out to be a performance
>> penalty for the paced flow?
>
> Nope. The paced flow puts less strain on the buffer (and hooray for that),
> which is a win no matter if the buffer is contended or not.

I just posted some test results for 450 simultaneous flows on a new thread.
sch_fq has a fixed per flow packet limit of 100 packets, which shows up here.

Cake did surprisingly well, I have no idea why. I suspect my kernel is broken,
actually. I am getting on a plane in a bit, and have done too much work this
"vacation" already.

Has anyone added pacing to netperf yet? (I can do so, but would need
guidance as to what getopt option to add)

>> fq_codel gives incentives to do pacing but if it's not deployed what's the
>> performance gain of using pacing?
>
> fq_codel doesn't give any specific incentive to do pacing.
\
Concur, except that in the case where there is no queue for that flow,
fq_codel gives a boost.

> In fact, if
> absolutely all devices on your path would use fq_codel and have adequate
> buffers, I believe pacing would be largely a no-op.

Concur.

> /* Steinar */
> --
> Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat



-- 
Dave Täht
Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67