On Sun, 4 Dec 2016, Jonathan Foulkes wrote:
Hear, hear, the concept of having ‘simulators’ for typical heavy modern web
pages is exactly what we need to get across the benefits of lowered bloat
having a larger impact on page-load performance than ‘speed’.
Those simulated pages should report
Dave Taht writes:
> COCOMO on flent is actually pretty accurate, within a factor of 2 or so.
>
> dave@nemesis:~/git$ cd flent
> dave@nemesis:~/git/flent$ loccount -c .
> all19579 (100.00%) in 85 files
> python 18380 (93.88%) in 65 files
> c
On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Dave Taht wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 5:40 AM, Rich Brown
> wrote:
> > As I browse the web, I see several sets of performance measurement using
> either netperf or iperf, and never know if either offers an
On Sun, Dec 04, 2016 at 09:13:19AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> You could turn off pacing , and keep fq.
>
> tc qdisc change dev eth0 root fq nopacing
I don't really care about fair queueing except for pacing :-) But I'll try
upgrading the kernel at some point. The results in turning off fq were
COCOMO on flent is actually pretty accurate, within a factor of 2 or so.
dave@nemesis:~/git$ cd flent
dave@nemesis:~/git/flent$ loccount -c .
all19579 (100.00%) in 85 files
python 18380 (93.88%) in 65 files
c629 (3.21%) in 3 files
shell370 (1.89%)
On Sun, 2016-12-04 at 09:44 +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 03:24:28PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Wait a minute. If you use fq on the receiver, then maybe your old debian
> > kernel did not backport :
> >
> >
On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 5:40 AM, Rich Brown wrote:
> As I browse the web, I see several sets of performance measurement using
> either netperf or iperf, and never know if either offers an advantage.
>
> I know Flent uses netperf by default: what are the reason(s) for
Hear, hear, the concept of having ‘simulators’ for typical heavy modern web
pages is exactly what we need to get across the benefits of lowered bloat
having a larger impact on page-load performance than ‘speed’.
Those simulated pages should report total page load time and maybe even how
many
As I browse the web, I see several sets of performance measurement using either
netperf or iperf, and never know if either offers an advantage.
I know Flent uses netperf by default: what are the reason(s) for selecting it?
Thanks.
Rich
___
Bloat
On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 03:24:28PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Wait a minute. If you use fq on the receiver, then maybe your old debian
> kernel did not backport :
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/davem/net.git/commit/?id=9878196578286c5ed494778ada01da094377a686
I checked, and
10 matches
Mail list logo