"'DRC' via TurboVNC User Discussion/Support"
<[email protected]> writes:

> Yes, I need you to test the very latest bits.  The code that might
> have caused the issue to regress was pushed just yesterday.

I have tried this for a while now, seems to be working, and upgraded
again today, still works.

Thanks!

/Joakim

>
> DRC
>
> On 2/9/23 2:26 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> "'DRC' via TurboVNC User Discussion/Support"
>> <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> Please re-test with one of the latest pre-release builds (either 3.0.x or 
>>> 3.1 evolving) of the TurboVNC Server.  I had to
>>> modify the congestion control algorithms yet again to fix 
>>> https://github.com/turbovnc/turbovnc/issues/359.  In my
>>> testing, the update problem you observed is still gone, #359 is fixed, and 
>>> the congestion control algorithms perform
>>> noticeably better on high-latency connections.  However, I need independent 
>>> confirmation.
>> I havent had this problem for a while, I usually update the turbovnc rpm
>> fairly often. I can try with the very latest bits and pieces and see if
>> its still gone.
>>
>> Regards
>> /Joakim
>>
>>> DRC
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, November 3, 2021 at 4:55:16 AM UTC-5 joakimv wrote:
>>>
>>>   "'DRC' via TurboVNC User Discussion/Support"
>>>   <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>>>   > This should be fixed in the latest dev/3.0 evolving pre-release build
>>>   > of the TurboVNC Server, but please let me know if it isn't.  In
>>>   > addition to fixing a couple of errors I made in the process of porting
>>>   > the overhauled congestion control algorithms from TigerVNC 1.10.x into
>>>   > TurboVNC 3.0, I also revised the algorithms so that they treat an ETA
>>>   > of <= 0 as uncongested.  TigerVNC can get away with not doing that
>>>   > because it has a "frame timer" that, by default, wakes up every 1/60
>>>   > sec and attempts to send any framebuffer updates that were previously
>>>   > deferred (due to congestion or otherwise.)  In the case of TurboVNC,
>>>   > however, reporting congestion without setting the congestion timer
>>>   > results in updates not being delivered in a timely manner.  (Basically
>>>   > the undelivered updates languished until mouse input was received,
>>>   > which triggered a new framebuffer update in order to deliver the
>>>   > updated cursor position.)
>>>
>>>   I'm testing the turbovnc rpm, 29 oct, hash
>>>   4023c59bc24a0f75e09c5453ca76ac38.
>>>
>>>   It seems the screen repaint problem is indeed gone, I don't however have
>>>   an objective measure, I just observe that the remote emacs instance I use
>>>   all the time doesnt seem to exhibit these issues anymore.
>>>
>>>   Regarding performance, this server doesnt have a gpu, so performance is
>>>   as can be expected whitout gpu. I will try another server with gpu next.
>>>
>>>   >
>>>   > Please also let me know if the performance on
>>>   > high-latency/low-bandwidth networks doesn't meet your expectations.  I
>>>   > test this stuff by using two Linux machines, both of which are using
>>>   > the built-in Linux traffic control mechanism to emulate a 200 ms/100
>>>   > Mbit WAN connection.  With the TurboVNC Viewer maximized on a
>>>   > 1920x1200 (2-megapixel) screen and using the "Tight + Low-Quality
>>>   > JPEG" preset, I execute
>>>   >
>>>   >   vglrun /opt/VirtualGL/bin/glxspheres64 -fs -i
>>>   >
>>>   > in the TurboVNC session and
>>>   >
>>>   >   tcbench -lb -mx 100 -s 200
>>>   >
>>>   > on the client to both drive continuous mouse input into GLXspheres and
>>>   > measure the end-to-end frame rate.  With this setup, I measure about
>>>   > 35 frames/sec with TurboVNC 2.2.6, about 50 frames/sec with the tip of
>>>   > the dev branch, and about 30 frames/sec with TigerVNC 1.10.x.  The
>>>   > reduced frame rate with TigerVNC may be due to the aforementioned
>>>   > frame timer.  I also observed random black rectangles in the middle of
>>>   > the spheres when using TigerVNC, due to their partial framebuffer
>>>   > update delivery "feature." (Frankly, I do not like that feature,
>>>   > because it effectively causes 3D applications with VirtualGL to appear
>>>   > as if they are not double-buffered.)  I would love to have an open
>>>   > dialogue with the TigerVNC developers regarding these issues,
>>>   > particularly if that dialogue included best practices for benchmarking
>>>   > the congestion control algorithms, but given their unwillingness to
>>>   > answer a simple question regarding the algorithms, I am not hopeful.
>>>   > I think it best if we just test things ourselves and thus build
>>>   > confidence in TurboVNC's implementation.
>>>   >
>>>   > DRC
>>>   >
>>>   > On 10/22/21 3:42 PM, DRC wrote:
>>>   >> I observe a similar issue sometimes when resizing the remote
>>>   >> desktop, and if it's the same issue, then it is due to the updated
>>>   >> RFB flow control algorithms
>>>   >> 
>>> (https://github.com/TurboVNC/turbovnc/commit/a0f5670ecc42538f95f56ee81a885c6ba32916f1).
>>>   >>
>>>   >> If the flow control statistics are reset due to an idle connection,
>>>   >> then a situation can occur in which the connection is marked as
>>>   >> congested but no ETA is provided for when it will become
>>>   >> uncongested.  That results in undelivered framebuffer updates.
>>>   >>
>>>   >> Referring to:
>>>   >> 
>>> https://github.com/TigerVNC/tigervnc/commit/a99d14d1939cb2338b6268d9aebe3850df66daed#r57748408
>>>   >> I have asked the TigerVNC developers for clarification but have not
>>>   >> heard back.  My next step is to instrument the TigerVNC Server code
>>>   >> and attempt to figure out why their server doesn't seem to suffer
>>>   >> from the same symptoms, even though it has the same algorithmic flaw
>>>   >> (or at least what I perceive to be a flaw, but maybe I'm missing
>>>   >> something.)
>>>   >>
>>>   >> DRC
>>>   >>
>>>   >> On 10/22/21 2:42 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>   >>> Hello,
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>> I'm experiencing som problems with screen updates in turbovnc "3.0
>>>   >>> evolving", rpm turbovnc-2.2.80-20211011. I'm using fedora 35 on the
>>>   >>> client, 34 on the server. The repaint problem happens mostly in emacs,
>>>   >>> because thats what i use the most.
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>> If I open a shell buffer and do a "ls" the output seems to happen at
>>>   >>> the server, but the repaint isnt propagated to the client. If I wiggle
>>>   >>> the mouse cursor a bit, the screen update do happen.
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>> I've tried some different configurations, like changing the update
>>>   >>> frequency, encoding quality and so on, and the problem doesnt happen.
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>> Any hints?
>>>   >>> Regards
>>>   >>> /Joakim/
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>
>>>   --
>>>   Joakim Verona
>>>   [email protected]
-- 
Joakim Verona
[email protected]

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TurboVNC User Discussion/Support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/turbovnc-users/871qmg6t7t.fsf%40tanaka.verona.se.

Reply via email to