On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 2:11 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ruben <[email protected]> writes: > > > Hey Toke, > > > > Am 13.09.2018 21:12 schrieb Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]>: > > > > > > Ruben <[email protected]> writes: > > > > > Hey Toke, > > > > > > Thanks for your fast response! > > > > > > Am 13.09.2018 12:27 schrieb Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > > Ruben <[email protected]> writes: > > > > > > > Hey guys, > > > > > > > > I've already mentioned this in a response to dtaht on GitHub, > > but > > here > > > > again for everyone: > > > > > > > > I was wondering if it's possible to extend the tin statistics by > > > > packets for backlog. > > > > > > Why do you need packets when there's already bytes? > > > > > > Easy: dtaht requested a packets graph with ecn marks, which is also > > > packets, so backlog as bytes do not fit, backlog as packets do. > > > > > > The idea was to do a multi-graph which is one graph with combined > > > stats for all tins and sub graphs for all tins. > > > > > > On the main graph a backlog in packets is available, but I would need > > > to leave out the backlog for the tins, which is somewhat confusing. > > > > Why not just do both backlogs in bytes? > > > > There's no counter for ecn marked packets in bytes, so it's impossible to > > implement it that way, too. > > > > ECN-Marks is in packets, so everything else need to be in packets as > > well. > > Hmm, so the obvious follow-up question would be "why do you need to have > backlog and number of drops on the same graph?" :)
A reasonable approximation of backlog in packets is achievable by dividing by 1000. > -Toke > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake -- Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619 _______________________________________________ Cake mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
