John Heffner wrote: > Al Boldi wrote: > > Which module would you suggest for a non-congested network? > > "It depends." There are quite a few papers out there on this. It's > currently an area of active research. Which one/s do you use? > > Or is there a module that allows for a=(n+x)*MSS where x is tunable? > > You could write one. I don't know that you would want to... I could probably modify one. Could you point me to the part that needs changing? > >> If you are actually CPU limited, on an SMP system you can also get > >> better performance with multiple connections, since they can be handled > >> concurrently by multiple CPU's. > > > > It seems that CPU cycles are related to latency, which is related to > > bandwidth-delay. So a faster CPU should yield higher thruput, which it > > does, but this would mean, that thruput is dependent on system load as > > that affects latency. > > > > Is there a module that takes this fluctuation into account, to yield a > > constant flow? > > Sorry, not following. CPU cycles only add to latency if you don't have > any. If you don't have spare CPU cycles, you're not going to be sending > any faster! Sure, but faster sending is only one aspect of higher total thruput, the other aspect being constant/non-fluctuating flow, as TCP thruput is rather sensitive to fluctuating latencies. So, is there a module that takes this fluctuation into account, to yield a constant flow? Or do I have to write that one too :) Thanks! -- Al - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
