> Jim Wright wrote: > > I think there is still a case for attempting percent limiting. I agree > > with your point that we can not discover the full bandwidth of the > > link and adjust to that. The approach discovers the current available > > bandwidth and adjusts to that. The usefullness is in trying to be > > unobtrusive to other users. > > Does it really fit that description, though? Given that it runs > full-bore for 15 seconds (not that that's very long)...
I guess it depends on the type of users you are sharing with and the upstream switches and routers. My experience is that with some routers and switches a single user wget'ing an iso can cause web-browsing people to experience slow response. That kind of application is not one where 15sec will make much difference, and in fact there's a big backoff after that first 15sec. OTOH if you are sharing with latency-sensitive apps (VOIP, realtime control, etc.) and a wget bogs your app down, you better fix your switches and routers- you will be affected by anybody in an interactive web browser streaming youtube or whatever too. This patch is not a solution for that use case, and I agree that there really isn't one that an app like wget can reasonably implement (without delving into nonportable OS stuff). Tony
