<div dir='auto'><div>Hey Dave,<div dir="auto"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">Am 19.09.2018 19:01 schrieb Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 2:11 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> wrote:
<br>
>
<br>
> Ruben <ruben@vfn-nrw.de> writes:
<br>
>
<br>
> > Hey Toke,
<br>
> >
<br>
> > Am 13.09.2018 21:12 schrieb Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>:
<br>
> >
<br>
> >
<br>
> > Ruben <ruben@vfn-nrw.de> writes:
<br>
> >
<br>
> > > Hey Toke,
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > > Thanks for your fast response!
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > > Am 13.09.2018 12:27 schrieb Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>:
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > > Ruben <ruben@vfn-nrw.de> writes:
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > > > Hey guys,
<br>
> > > >
<br>
> > > > I've already mentioned this in a response to dtaht on GitHub, but
<br>
> > here
<br>
> > > > again for everyone:
<br>
> > > >
<br>
> > > > I was wondering if it's possible to extend the tin statistics by
<br>
> > > > packets for backlog.
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > > Why do you need packets when there's already bytes?
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > > Easy: dtaht requested a packets graph with ecn marks, which is also
<br>
> > > packets, so backlog as bytes do not fit, backlog as packets do.
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > > The idea was to do a multi-graph which is one graph with combined
<br>
> > > stats for all tins and sub graphs for all tins.
<br>
> > >
<br>
> > > On the main graph a backlog in packets is available, but I would need
<br>
> > > to leave out the backlog for the tins, which is somewhat confusing.
<br>
> >
<br>
> > Why not just do both backlogs in bytes?
<br>
> >
<br>
> > There's no counter for ecn marked packets in bytes, so it's impossible to
<br>
> > implement it that way, too.
<br>
> >
<br>
> > ECN-Marks is in packets, so everything else need to be in packets as
<br>
> > well.
<br>
>
<br>
> Hmm, so the obvious follow-up question would be "why do you need to have
<br>
> backlog and number of drops on the same graph?" :)
<br>
<br>
A reasonable approximation of backlog in packets is achievable by
<br>
dividing by 1000.
<br></p></blockquote></div></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This only works for general internet traffic. It would probably confuse user with say VoIP gateways.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I think it's better (if we really want to go this way) to use the average package size of the past packages per queue by diving the sent bytes by the sent packages.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But I'm still not convinced, that this is the best option we got. How difficult is just a conter on the cake-side?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Best regards</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Ruben</div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr"></p></blockquote></div></div></div></div>