From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: "Dave Täht" <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net,
"cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Cake] some reference numbers for cake performance on x86_64
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 10:59:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <36908DFD-B5A9-45E5-BBA1-AC25618997E1@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw7xpa5+DyEQY_VFULUwm5D9Pq9bzRbT6gmJRw+hEKwZYA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Dave, hi list,
On Jun 29, 2015, at 01:42 , Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a set of two hop (client-server through switch) results, with
> sch_fq on the nuc client, and cake on the rangeley (ranger) server.
>
> Since we seem to be aiming for sane results from the mvneta, at speeds
> at 500mbit...
>
> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/k500/
>
> Do note that this is a live system with other traffic so it is noisy data.
>
> Of note, in looking at this dataset in comparison to mikaels, is that
> he only got 360mbit bidirectional on rrul_be - where I get full
> throughput. admittedly he seemed to be running using htb as the rate
> limiter. Being off by *20%* from the set setting (after subtracting
> acks) of 500 mbit however, seems to be an issue.
So ignoring the ACKs we can expect a TCP/IPv4 payload rate up to 480 Mbps.
TCP/IPv4 Payload at 500Mbps shaping:
1500 - 20 - 20 = 1460 Byte
payload to OTWS ratio
1460/1518 = 0.961791831357
Payload Bandwidth
500*1460/1518 = 480.90 Mbps
Packet rate:
500*1000^2 / (1518 * 8) = 41K
In other words a loss of roughly 4 percent for the required protocol headers. For the ACK traffic an rough estimate would be:
one ACK for every other packet (allowing delayed ACKs), increasing the packet rates to roughly 60K per direction and eating:
(20000 * 64 * 8) / 1000^2 = 10.24 Mbps
So a rrul test should give us something close to 470Mbps (ignoring the UDP and ICMP flows and) or roughly 100-100*470/500 = 6% loss not 20%.
On the positive side I seem to remember we were looking for a rower that can handle 300Mbps bi-directionally and it seems the 1200ac cmes floes or even exceeds this threshold ;)
Best Regards
Sebastian
>
> I will setup another box to do client - router -server this week.
>
> --
> Dave Täht
> worldwide bufferbloat report:
> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat
> And:
> What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone?
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-29 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-28 23:42 [Cerowrt-devel] " Dave Taht
2015-06-29 8:59 ` Sebastian Moeller [this message]
2015-06-29 9:07 ` [Cerowrt-devel] [Cake] " Mikael Abrahamsson
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/cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=36908DFD-B5A9-45E5-BBA1-AC25618997E1@gmx.de \
--to=moeller0@gmx.de \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
/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