* [Codel] Sidebar to TCP Small Queues - cooperative bandwidth shaping
[not found] <mailman.1865.1342023468.1742.codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
@ 2012-07-11 18:11 ` David Collier-Brown
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: David Collier-Brown @ 2012-07-11 18:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: codel
On 07/11/2012 12:17 PM, codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net -> Ben
Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote
> On 07/11/2012 08:11 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 17:13 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> This introduce TSQ (TCP Small Queues)
...
>
> I haven't read your patch in detail, but I was wondering if this feature
> would cause trouble for applications that are servicing many sockets at once
> and so might take several ms between handling each individual socket.
>
> Or, applications that for other reasons cannot service sockets quite
> as fast. Without this feature, they could poke more data into the
> xmit queues to be handled by the kernel while the app goes about it's
> other user-space work?
>
> Maybe this feature could be enabled/tuned on a per-socket basis?
>
I speculate[1] that sharing of resources between applications, or
sockets within applications, can better be done as a separate action, by
using either a purely local mechanism like cgroups, or by a mechanism
that can use a global service-information daemon like the oldish
"trickle" bandwidth manager (still available on Fedora via "yum install
trickle")
Strictly speaking, only the trickled component would be needed, and
could conveniently reside on a router, while the the trickle shared
library could be used initially, and retired in favour of the proper
local control mechanism.
--dave
[1. Polite Canadian for "I'm pretty sure"]
--
David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
davecb@spamcop.net | -- Mark Twain
(416) 223-8968
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread