From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lang.hm (unknown [66.167.227.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CED193B29E; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 16:09:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from asgard.lang.hm (syslog [10.0.0.100]) by mail.lang.hm (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC2321147D8; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 13:09:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 13:09:46 -0800 (PST) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: "David P. Reed" cc: Dave Taht , cerowrt-devel , bloat In-Reply-To: <1638390391.091227727@apps.rackspace.com> Message-ID: References: <1638390391.091227727@apps.rackspace.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] uplink bufferbloat and scheduling problems X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 21:09:48 -0000 On Wed, 1 Dec 2021, David P. Reed wrote: > To say it again: More memory *doesn't* improve throughput when the queue > depths exceed one packet on average slight disagreement here. the buffer improves throughput up to the point where it handles one burst of packets. When packets are transmitted individually, that's about one packet (insert hand waving about scheduling delays, etc). but with wifi where you can transmit multiple packets in one airtime slot, you need enough buffer to handle the entire burst. David Lang