From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x22f.google.com (mail-qk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 392C63CB35 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 09:34:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qk0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 63so4624388qke.0 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 06:34:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=A9TXIqygrIkjdYJIuXwrhS+HUjqwXeuSgRxWW6RaooM=; b=HC1D6ksyhOdCx3TRDOIUcTv83brmnpAKILJTHFRxWLwdsE+6wTKrluKIxT1V4ciYcy ReXnPbCzND4KFQsja74e6tF2xh/idyriXMgR1PtODZa2g2cjy+Tgw12GWR/Tng5JrFxu 8KvEg2LKUZ5tpAQ7mkLjUxYCOknbzKydWFqpovB8Jg4vVZJeZ/xOapKrM2LtvfQc9hBY 2AB1Ls268ptqwFyoYBzngZIPdU/vjSlFPqll1/v1su86rdsLxUDqr0fyVB1e+Y867grh kkGswGc8bVFi0td+rF3NhEfFZW4yCj0jrihs8nr7RPNKFR67/iMDcywuMFC4zVvGSSse 9yCw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=A9TXIqygrIkjdYJIuXwrhS+HUjqwXeuSgRxWW6RaooM=; b=kGyq4/lweBvCYk2SzcBrqVHK92/zXdxTIKWW0Kkfvk1BlFD1AyuswIx0yiOrMlb8Mw Lw1UQWDI8irwqSPuzTcPw+8bYMOHjudFrZGDaohHfUHYOWUBLtx0d5WlIn5eJ51g+7FB 1ZB+7zerOyX7mO+ZOQc/w1X1/bEX9JrO6HmMVoZLHauUVb5cX91gVXDZwMJxy0pF0+UC o28RDl6CmSGWLwZo+LA051mvXgvJDjLn6arPaAjxxdAsPNNrMw1wsyJBduDhVTI7aH3G eHwlHs58Yk8SvoZFUUsd2uvP1GHCWY2DLTAGkb/DrAOoQNeF61UYsBpisVc2x/B01I7d 4sEQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5j40ePqJyXMG4y/Fc8xdIk0qWR1OBfZ8NYw7Ncx+GK8UvZrAYH e4VOND8Bv2omd5zk/8sasxDDCWy3JR0GK28OQkw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYO8eLv+grmOvQXuLmr5yTvA8k3dfy8/d826LecBU9UnkwZQPRlorYqbmzIcmPbW/zYedwTZQGppQ/sYSIr+Tc= X-Received: by 10.55.71.5 with SMTP id u5mr4423784qka.166.1511966052664; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 06:34:12 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.95.69 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 06:34:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <745FEC66-95A7-40E1-A8FA-57714D3AB6AC@gmail.com> <87zi76xlw5.fsf@nemesis.taht.net> <6F2894AD-87EA-4EFC-918E-625E49EDA977@gmail.com> <87o9nmxcbg.fsf@nemesis.taht.net> <87bmjmxbgw.fsf@nemesis.taht.net> <3FAFACA8-C918-4325-BF80-B7EBB6B9B4A7@gmail.com> From: Georgios Amanakis Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 09:34:12 -0500 Message-ID: To: Dave Taht Cc: Cake List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114a8d4a7b4b42055f2007f3" Subject: Re: [Cake] cake flenter results round 2 X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 14:34:13 -0000 --001a114a8d4a7b4b42055f2007f3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" With ack-filter-aggressive I get results similar to rrul1 in ~10% of the runs, 90% are similar to rrul2. With ack-filter I haven't managed yet to get a rrul1 result, all of them are similar to rrul2. Will experiment more today. George On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > the astounding figure is dropping ~70% of all packets, and tcp still > works at all. > > 682411 pkt (dropped 1511579 ...) > > is your 2nd result repeatable? What happens with just "ack-filter" not > aggressive? > > I keep thinking that a way to coax more performance out of 40GigE+ > might be to drop more acks (as correctly as possible) before they even > hit the server. > > --001a114a8d4a7b4b42055f2007f3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
With ack-filter-aggressive I get results si= milar to rrul1 in ~10% of the runs, 90% are similar to rrul2.
With= ack-filter I haven't managed yet to get a rrul1 result, all of them ar= e similar to rrul2.
Will experiment more today.

Geor= ge

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Dave Taht <= dave.taht@gmail.co= m> wrote:
the astounding fi= gure is dropping ~70% of all packets, and tcp still
works at all.

682411 pkt (dropped 1511579 ...)

is your 2nd result repeatable? What happens with just "ack-filter"= ; not
aggressive?

I keep thinking that a way to coax more performance out of 40GigE+
might be to drop more acks (as correctly as possible) before they even
hit the server.

--001a114a8d4a7b4b42055f2007f3--