Re: Test Tree Regression Tests

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



|  > (I am using different FIFO length since I know from experience that otherwise the bridge
|  > can also incur loss.)
|  >
|  Can you post scripts for altering the fifo length? Is that equivalent
|  to the following for rate-limited? (from test page)
|  /sbin/tc qdisc add dev lan0 root handle 1:0 netem delay $1ms
|  /sbin/tc qdisc add dev lan1 root handle 1:0 netem delay $1ms
|  /sbin/tc qdisc add dev lan0 parent 1:1 handle 10: tbf rate $2kbit
|  buffer 10000 limit 30000

It is comparable but not equivalent, since in the above you are using a TBF which will change the nature
of the traffic. I use the following (with qlen=10000):

  	tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1:0 netem delay ${delay}ms
        tc qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:1 pfifo limit ${qlen}
 
(The same configuration is used on both interfaces.) I found that merely adding the tx qlen of the NIC
(via `ip link set ...') does not do much, and that especially if either the delay is slightly longer
or the difference in traffic is drastic (e.g. 100Mbps link with a TBF rate of 1 Mbps), a longer FIFO 
length is needed to avoid packets being dropped at the traffic shaper.
Plus, one gets all the nice statistics about queue drops and requeued etc. 


|  >     I note that on http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/DCCP_Testing#Network_emulation_setup
|  >     different loss values for forward/return are used. Has anyone further experience with this?
|  >     I wonder if feedback loss has heavier implications than forward loss?
|  >
|  
|  The reason for me putting zero % loss on return path is that we are
|  testing unidirectional flows. As such I wanted all feedback to come
|  back and if we lost feedback packets it would increase variability. We
|  should test loss of feedback packets for protocol reasons but not so
|  much for performance testing.
Ah - I see, so this means that for performance testing I'd have to use:?

        tc qdisc add dev eth0 root netem delay 75ms loss 10%      # the forward path
        tc qdisc add dev eth1 root netem delay 75ms		  # reverse path (no feedback loss)

Maybe we should add a line on the OSDL page, it is something that had slightly confused me.


|  Your webserver seems to be down.... No pages on
|  http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/ work at present.
Occasional, short downtime is possible, but usually the webserver runs all the time. It is ok again.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [IETF DCCP]     [Linux Networking]     [Git]     [Security]     [Linux Assembly]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux