From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:40:43 +0000 Subject: Re: [Announce]: Test results with latest CCID3 patch set Message-Id: <20071211174043.GG24046@ghostprotocols.net> List-Id: References: <20071210154008.GA16839@gerrit.erg.abdn.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <20071210154008.GA16839@gerrit.erg.abdn.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: dccp@vger.kernel.org Em Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 02:21:28PM +0000, Gerrit Renker escreveu: > | I am new of this mailing list and I am really interested in the > | measurements you are performing with DCCP. > This was more of a regression test, as there had been recent changes in > the test tree, to see that the kernel (not userspace) still performs in > a predictable way. > > | Which tool are you using ? Are you using Iperf for such measurements ? > The setup is the one from > http://www.linux-foundation.org/en/Net:DCCP_Testing#Regression_testing > and, yes, it uses iperf. > > | Have you ever heard about D-ITG ? > > | You can find more information here: > | http://www.grid.unina.it/software/ITG > | > | I am one of the authors of such platform and I have also > | performed some very preliminary tests with DCCP. > | > | I would be very glad to have your opinion on that and I'm very interested > | in improving its features, also with specific regard to the support of > | transport protocols. > | > It is a very nice tool with many features. I only ran simple tests with it (version 2.6), > again only as basic sanity tests -- the throughput result was similar to the one tested with > iperf. > > I think that the tool has more to offer and can help improve/extend DCCP testing. > Here is my list of points, hoping that the others will add theirs, too: > > * would be good to have a standardised set of scripts, for comparison/benchmarking > > * the built-in VoIP module only works for UDP -- is it possible to port this to DCCP? > > * as per previous email, more complex traffic scenarios would be good, in particular > - switching on/off background traffic at times to observe TCP/flow-friendliness > - running multiple DCCP flows in parallel and at overlapping times Does this tool records results in a database keyed by kernel version/buildid for us to use it as a regression tool? Something that would produce results around these lines: "WARNING: test #23 counter #3 variance bigger than specified since the last kernel tested (git cset 55ed793afb4a8025d33a8e6a5f2f89d5ac4d8432)!" - Arnaldo