Re: [ns] R: which trace format is more accurate?

[Sasan Sahraei]

Marco,

This is the exact point,

the difference is about 300 to 400 for 100 sec sim time

I reran the same simulation and all I did was to change the trace format,
but I see such a difference in number of sent

$1~/s/  /AGT/  { sent ++; }

any comments?

both running on the same machine. all the equipment and environment
settings are the same. you might be able to reproduce it easily.

Thanks,
Sasan


 Sasan,

 I see your point.
 How much do differ results you got in the two
 cases?
 By exact same simulation you mean that you simply
 changed the
 trace format and nothing else (included
 the machine you working on)?

 Regards,

 Marco Fiore

Messaggio originale
Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ucc.ie
Data: 15-apr-2006 9.33 PM
A: Marco Fiore[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], ns-users@isi.edu
Ogg: Re: R: [ns]
 which trace format is more accurate?

Marco,

I agree that I need
 separate awk scripts for different trace formats but
the particular
 example that I gave below is straight forward

$1~/s/  /AGT/  {
 sent ++; }

and should return total number of sents message in a
 simulation and that
still returns different values (unless this is not
 the correct way to
calculate the total sent messages)

what do you
 think?

Thanks,
Sasan



 Sasan,

 both versions of
 tracefile report the same information.
 The
 difference only lies
 in the format (actually, the
 new trace format is
 somehow more
 complete).
 So they are accurate in the same way, but the
 point

 is that you can't use the same awk script on both!
 You have to

 write two versions of you awk script,
 and then you'll get the same
 results.

 Regards,

 Marco Fiore

Messaggio
 originale
Da:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Data: 15-apr-2006 8.06
 AM
A: ns-users@ISI.EDU
Ogg: [ns] which trace format is more
 accurate?


Hi All,

I am
 generating both trace
 formats (old and new) for the exact same
simulation, and for
 instance I count total number of messages sent as
below (in my awk
 file)

$1~/s/  /AGT/  { sent ++; }

but I get
 two
 different results

now I wonder, which one of the trace files are
 accurate? which one should
I pick? the version is 2.29.

I'll
 appreciate your advice.

Thanks,
Sasan

[ns] R: which trace format is more accurate?

[Marco Fiore]

Sasan,

both versions of tracefile report the same information.
The 
difference only lies in the format (actually, the
new trace format is 
somehow more complete).
So they are accurate in the same way, but the 
point
is that you can't use the same awk script on both!
You have to 
write two versions of you awk script,
and then you'll get the same 
results.

Regards,

Marco Fiore

Messaggio originale
Da: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Data: 15-apr-2006 8.06 AM
A: ns-users@ISI.EDU
Ogg: [ns] which trace format is more accurate?


Hi All,

I am 
generating both trace formats (old and new) for the exact same
simulation, and for instance I count total number of messages sent as
below (in my awk file)

$1~/s/  /AGT/  { sent ++; }

but I get 
two different results

now I wonder, which one of the trace files are 
accurate? which one should
I pick? the version is 2.29.

I'll 
appreciate your advice.

Thanks,
Sasan