revolutions per minute - a new metric for measuring responsiveness
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
Cc: Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Rpm] Example plots for USB3 and thunderbolt Gigabit ethernet dongles
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2022 18:54:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <040FB6F3-4BF8-423C-8F8C-4150EAA0965B@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B6EA250F-62C6-4DDD-992C-19D4E8DC7FFC@gmx.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1098 bytes --]

Argh, sorry, this time with both images...

> On Jun 19, 2022, at 18:07, Sebastian Moeller via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> 
> IMHO this is a great illustration why bidirectionally saturating tests (as networkQuality does by default) are really a relevant test. I would go as far as arguing that it is better than doing upload and download independently, especially if the latency detection can converted to OWDs...
> 
> As I proposed at another place, if the latency probe would return the time from the server OWDs would be measurable (and if the OWDs are first measured without load, the deltaOWD caused by the load can even be calculated with unsynchronized clocks at both ends).
> 
> Regards
> 	Sebastian
> 
> P.S.: These plots are the optinal output of the crusader GUI after a successful measurement; I really like the co-registered throughput and latency graphs.
> 
> 
> pos<plot 2022.06.18 23-47-59.png>


>   
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm mailing list
> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm


[-- Attachment #2.1: Type: text/html, Size: 2068 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.2: plot 2022.06.19 17-25-41.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 72624 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.3: plot 2022.06.18 23-47-59.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 112070 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2022-06-19 16:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-19 16:07 Sebastian Moeller
2022-06-19 16:54 ` Sebastian Moeller [this message]

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/rpm.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=040FB6F3-4BF8-423C-8F8C-4150EAA0965B@gmx.de \
    --to=moeller0@gmx.de \
    --cc=rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /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