From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, wenji@fnal.gov,
akpm@osdl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:54:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061130205428.GA21140@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061130204908.GA19393@elte.hu>
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> [...] Instead what i'd like to see is more TCP performance (and a
> nicer over-the-wire behavior - no retransmits for example) /with the
> same 10% CPU time used/. Are we in rough agreement?
put in another way: i'd like to see the "TCP bytes transferred per CPU
time spent by the TCP stack" ratio to be maximized in a load-independent
way (part of which is the sender host too: to not cause unnecessary
retransmits is important as well). In a high-load scenario this means
that any measure that purely improves TCP throughput by giving it more
cycles is not a real improvement. So the focus should be on throttling
intelligently and without causing extra work on the sender side either -
not on trying to circumvent throttling measures.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-30 20:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-30 1:56 [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP Wenji Wu
2006-11-30 2:19 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 6:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 6:30 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 6:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 7:12 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 7:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 9:52 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-11-30 10:07 ` Nick Piggin
2006-11-30 10:22 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-11-30 10:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 17:04 ` Wenji Wu
2006-11-30 20:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 20:58 ` Wenji Wu
2006-11-30 20:22 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 20:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 20:38 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 20:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 20:54 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2006-11-30 20:55 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 20:14 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 20:42 ` Wenji Wu
2006-12-01 9:53 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-12-01 23:18 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 6:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 16:08 ` Wenji Wu
2006-11-30 20:06 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-11-30 16:51 ` Lee Revell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-11-30 2:02 Wenji Wu
2006-11-30 6:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-29 23:27 [Changelog] " Wenji Wu
2006-11-29 23:28 ` [patch 1/4] " Wenji Wu
2006-11-30 0:53 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 1:08 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 1:13 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 6:04 ` Mike Galbraith
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061130205428.GA21140@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=wenji@fnal.gov \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.