Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR) wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,Harald Barth wr > ites: >> As xplot was not available as portage I tried xplot->gnuplot. >> Don't do that. The xplot graphics shows much better what is >> going on than the converted gnuplot. I used xplot 0.90.7.1 >>from http://www.xplot.org/. > > i added some sample plots from some early results. > > write.xplot shows a 1m write from a client to the server. it consists of > two calls (and i think the retransmit message from rxtrace2xplot is bogus > here since it doesnt understand the backward direction of the exchange). > > compare this with read.xplot from the same directory. this is a ready > of a 1m file with a cache chunksize of 14. (i think i am missing some > arrow heads). note that there is an rx call for chunksize. this makes > the plot somewhat difficult to read but you can see that this doesnt > perform well (perhaps i should put arrows pointing down for one direction > and point up for the other direction). with 11 rx datagrams per read > (2^14/RX_DATAGRAM_SIZE) you can see that rx never really gets out of > slow start. you get 3 packets, 4 and then the last 4. next call, you > restart at 3 packets again. the rx window never gets close to filling. > also, every 11 packets, you need to wait for a another complete roundtrip > to the server. > > so while rx could be improved, afs' usage thereof could be improved a > bit.
why is slow start "per call"? That can't be right. _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
