From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Furniss Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 00:03:57 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] hfsc scheduler Message-Id: <4182DA6D.2040401@dsl.pipex.com> List-Id: References: <2f6c0cb2041029160678a8894b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2f6c0cb2041029160678a8894b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lartc@vger.kernel.org yoyo wrote: > i remember on this list someone tried hfsc (he had some nice > comparison graphs between hfsc&htb) but i can't seem to find the > message in the archives.. :( This one. Andy. Vincent Perrier wrote: > HTB versus HFSC, both qdisc offer the same kind of service, > if you want to see comparative test results, go to > http://www.rawsoft.org > at the line "TEST RESULTS" you will find the results for > a sharing test and a burst test. > You will see that both qdisc are good. Nice comparision, very interesting. Note that you have a small misconfiguration in your HFSC setup. On page 8 you say "The shaping is impacted by real time bursts". This is only because your real-time classes are not part of the link-sharing hierarchy. If you add link-share curves to the real-time classes which are equal to the real-time curves shaping won't be impacted. Regards Patrick _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/