Cake - FQ_codel the next generation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Cake List <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: [Cake] a couple quick test runs of the v17+1 patchset
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 13:39:44 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA93jw4VYWacQLJxSmMgb6U9E5gerYM+ZMj8kLbUgtDeKr2aow@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

The paper makes the claim that we can shape to .1% of the bandwidth
and win. Well, at gigE rates, it's closer to .2%, as setting the
shaper to 980mbit got consistently sub 2.2ms RTT latency on the rrul
test, higher usually cracked 5 or 6, while bandwidth went from 934 to
936. So we can take a .2%-ish bandwidth hit in exchange for reducing
the max latency by 2/3s on this particular test series.

And this of course ignores the impact of flow control, my environment,
academic rigor, etc, etc. And I shudder to go measure the cpu
overhead.

And it didn't crash, and perhaps I'll go play with cake with veth
simulating > gigE bandwidths.

Only question is: why is the capacity estimate 970mbit?

root@spaceheater:~/git/linux/tc-adv/tc# ./tc -s qdisc show dev enp6s0
qdisc cake 8017: root refcnt 2 bandwidth 980Mbit diffserv3
triple-isolate split-gso rtt 100.0ms raw overhead 0
 Sent 23871634960 bytes 17506050 pkt (dropped 2, overlimits 30089616 requeues 7)
 backlog 370996b 246p requeues 7
 memory used: 1053008b of 15140Kb
 capacity estimate: 970Mbit
 min/max network layer size:           42 /    1514
 min/max overhead-adjusted size:       42 /    1514
 average network hdr offset:           14

                   Bulk  Best Effort        Voice
  thresh      61250Kbit      980Mbit      245Mbit
  target          5.0ms        5.0ms        5.0ms
  interval      100.0ms      100.0ms      100.0ms
  pk_delay        4.1ms        3.2ms        4.2ms
  av_delay        2.3ms        2.4ms        3.1ms
  sp_delay        231us        642us        321us
  backlog        27318b      263436b       80242b
  pkts          1476388     11611873      4418037
  bytes      1497338404  16405801643   5968868937
  way_inds            0            8            0
  way_miss           12          209           15
  way_cols            0            0            0
  drops               2            0            0
  marks               0            0            0
  ack_drop            0            0            0
  sp_flows            2            4            3
  bk_flows            1            2            1
  un_flows            0            0            0
  max_len         68130        68130        68130
  quantum          1514         1514         1514






-- 

Dave Täht
CEO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-669-226-2619

             reply	other threads:[~2018-05-30 20:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-30 20:39 Dave Taht [this message]
2018-05-30 20:53 ` Dave Taht

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAA93jw4VYWacQLJxSmMgb6U9E5gerYM+ZMj8kLbUgtDeKr2aow@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=dave.taht@gmail.com \
    --cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox