Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> writes: > I wanted to look at a few things - cpu usage, 4 different tcps, > different server schedulers, ecn vs non-ecn, sqm fq_codel simplest.qos > vs cake, etc, etc. I just did tcp_ndown tests of 128 flows to see what > happened for starters. I also tried to capture tcp_cwnd, etc, stats, > but that seems not to be plotting in flent.... > > My first objective, of course, was to make sure upstream cake didn't > crash. It didn't. No real surprises, cake ecn causes some more > collateral inter-packet latency damage, cake (aside from general cpu > over-usage) is a mild win across the board... including, surprisingly, > tail drop queue depth. (see below) > > metric ton of flent files: http://www.taht.net/~d/cake_128flows.tgz > (script therein) > topology: server -> apu2 -> switch -> client (no switch between the > apu2 and server) > > A couple notes: > > 1) ecn_vs_bbr_ineffective.png: > > vs bbr in ecn mode, (thus rendering codel or cake ineffective and > reverting to tail drop) "sqm simplest.qos" at this speed (100mbit) > uses a too large packet limit vs what cake uses. I will argue in favor > of using the new "memlimit" parameter to fq_codel in the sqm scripts > to better limit the buffer size.
Openwrt carries a patch to default the memlimit to 4 MB rather than 32... -Toke _______________________________________________ Cake mailing list Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake