[Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: Re: CeroWrt 3.10.24-8 badly bloated?

[Fred Stratton]

I use simple.qos because it gave slightly better qualitative empirical 
results.

If anyone prefers that I switch to simplest.qos for testing purposes, I 
shall do so.

On 27/12/13 19:49, Dave Taht wrote:
>
>
> Pie has a default latency target of 20ms, fq codel 5ms. (But the fq 
> code target matters less as the target only applies to queue building 
> flows)
>
> A packet takes 13ms to transit the device at 1mbit.
>
> There is a change to fq codel in this release that should make 
> fiddling with target a low speeds less needed. (But might have other 
> problems) Still a comparison at roughly the same target vs a vs pie in 
> your environment would be very interesting.
>
> I suggested 25ms as a test (as pie never makes 20ms anyway)
>
> I came close to inserting a simple formula to start increasing the 
> target below 4mbit in this release.
>
> On Dec 27, 2013 11:25 AM, "Sebastian Moeller" <moeller0 at gmx.de 
> <mailto:moeller0 at gmx.de>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Fred,
> >
> > you could try to put "target 25ms" without the quotes into the 
> advanced egress options field in the "Queue Discipline" tab, that is 
> exposed after checking "Show Dangerous Configuration". I would love to 
> hear whether that worked or not (I am not able to test anything 
> myself). Maybe posting the output of "tc -d qdisc" and "tc class show 
> dev ge00" would help. Good luck…
> >
> >
> > Best Regards
> >         Sebastian
> >
> >
> > On Dec 27, 2013, at 20:20 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton at imap.cc> wrote:
> >
> > > I have been using pie for approximately 3 weeks.
> > >
> > > You are correct, in that the outbound speed is about 800 - 900 kb/s.
> > >
> > > I shall try what you suggest, but do not know how to express the 
> target of 25 ms as a configuration option.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 27/12/13 19:15, Dave Taht wrote:
> > >> Dear fred: are you sticking with pie? I was going to suggest you 
> try fq codel with a target 25ms on your outbound. (You are at 800kbit 
> or so as best I recall?)
> > >>
> > >> On Dec 27, 2013 11:10 AM, "Fred Stratton" <fredstratton at imap.cc> 
> wrote:
> > >> I upgraded to 3.10.24-8 on 2013-12-23.
> > >>
> > >> I modified /etc/fixdaemons, adding
> > >> /etc/init.d/sqm restart
> > >>
> > >> input the appropriate sqm settings, transcribed from aqm
> > >>
> > >> rebooted
> > >>
> > >> and the build works very well. For ADSL2+ here, it is the best so 
> far.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 27/12/13 18:55, Dave Taht wrote:
> > >>> A race condition appears to have crept in...
> > >>>
> > >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > >>> From: "Dave Taht" <dave.taht at gmail.com <mailto:dave.taht at gmail.com>>
> > >>> Date: Dec 27, 2013 10:47 AM
> > >>> Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] CeroWrt 3.10.24-8 badly bloated?
> > >>> To: "Richard E. Brown" <richb.hanover at gmail.com 
> <mailto:richb.hanover at gmail.com>>
> > >>> Cc:
> > >>>
> > >>> Probably didn't start sqm properly
> > >>>
> > >>> Restart it by hand via /etc/init.d/sqm restart
> > >>>
> > >>> tc -s qdisc show dev ge00
> > >>>
> > >>> Should show htb and fq codel.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Dec 27, 2013 10:36 AM, "Rich Brown" <richb.hanover at gmail.com 
> <mailto:richb.hanover at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >>> So I screwed up my courage and replaced my 3.10.18-? firmware in 
> my primary router with 3.10.24-8. That version had worked well as a 
> secondary, so I figured, What the heck… Let’s give it try.
> > >>>
> > >>> The result was not pretty. I set my link speeds in the SQM page, 
> chose the defaults for the Queue Discipline tab, and link layer to ATM 
> with no additional overhead for my DSL link.
> > >>>
> > >>> Ping times to google are normally ~51-54 msec. But when I fired 
> up speedtest.net <http://speedtest.net>, they jumped to 1500-2500 
> msec. Is there something I should look at before reverting? Thanks.
> > >>>
> > >>> Rich
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > >>> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net 
> <mailto:Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net>
> > >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > >>>
> > >>> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net 
> <mailto:Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net>
> > >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > > Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net 
> <mailto:Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net>
> > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> >
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/attachments/20131227/e394418e/attachment-0002.html>