Still doesn't make sense to me. If you switch the node off completely, what's the bandwidth usage?
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 10:39:20AM +0100, Roman Bednarek wrote: > > > On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Bob wrote: > > >Roman Bednarek <roman at ...> writes: > > > >>On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, Matthew Toseland wrote: > >> > >>>It *should* work. It is believed to work. Do you have an > >>>inputBandwidthLimit set? That might be helpful - incoming traffic > >>>requires acknowledgement via outgoing packets. > >>> > >> No, I do not have inputBandwidthLimit set (my ADSL has much bigger > >>input than output), but now when I set it nothing has changed. I run it on > >>linux, if it doeas matter. On servlet/nodeinfo/performance/general page I > >>can read: > >> Current upstream bandwidth usage 208 bytes/second (5,1%) > >>and at the same time about 18KB on iptraf monitor(with only freenet > >>running). > >> I had to stop freenet node, to write that answer in pine, full > >>bandwidth was used and I even could not type. (not always is so bad, most > >>of the time something free is left). > >> > >> Roman > > > >Hmm, well that's odd. Output limiting is not accurate, and there can be a > >lag of > >up to 10 minutes before fred notices changes to the conf file, but it > >seems to > >basically work in my experience. Some disparity between fred's usage > >report and > >iptraf's could be explained by instantaneous vs. long period sampling, but > >can't > >explain a limit of 4k apparently maxing out your upstream. > > > >Could you post your outputBandwdithLimit line exactly as it appears in > >freenet.conf / freenet.ini, and maybe the immediately surrounding entries? > >I > >suspect it's not doing anything at all because it's somehow malformed, thus > >letting freenet run unlimited. > > > >Bob > > > The config option is specified correctly, I see that it is changing > bandwidth usage. Through trial and error and discovered that setting limit > to 2KB is acceptable for my upload bandwidth, it takes about 10-15KB. In > report "Current upstream bandwidth usage" is now a little bigger, around > specified 2KB, it is not the same what iptraf shows, but is better than > previous 0.2 KB. > So, the limit is not exact, but is working, and I was able to tune it > to my needs. > Long time ago, before Asynchronyous IO limiting was accurate, probably > limiting with nio is not always working as expected. > > > Roman > _______________________________________________ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20051206/748383fb/attachment.pgp>
