IMHO this is another example of 'batching helps to ameliorate per-batch
set-up/processing costs'. The trick I would say is to size the batches in a way
that they do not introduce too much latency granularity. For a server that
might be a coarser granularity than for a client or a home router. My gut
feeling tells me that the acceptable batch size is related to the required
transmission/processing time of a batch.
In a sense cake already coarsely takes this into account when disabling GSO
splitting at >= 1 Gbps rates. Maybe we could also scale the quantum more
aggressively, but it is a tradeoff....
Regards
On 26 September 2022 03:19:30 CEST, Dave Taht via Bloat
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Some good counterarguments against FQ and pacing.
>
>https://www.usenix.org/system/files/nsdi22-paper-ghasemirahni.pdf
>
>--
>FQ World Domination pending: https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/state_of_fq_codel/
>Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>_______________________________________________
>Bloat mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
