From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell Stuart Subject: Re: [PATCH] TC: bug fixes to the "sample" clause Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:11:46 +1000 Message-ID: <1142824306.4261.5.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> References: <1139538806.15476.33.camel@ras> <1142082696.5184.53.camel@jzny2> <1142225063.14909.77.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <1142269090.5242.29.camel@jzny2> <4415B217.30507@trash.net> <20060313100421.7df7f9ed@localhost.localdomain> <1142286237.17608.7.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <20060313135048.27b09fba@localhost.localdomain> <1142296295.17608.112.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <1142303082.5219.16.camel@jzny2> <1142306212.17608.178.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <1142307572.5219.73.camel@jzny2> <1142312708.17608.270.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <1142436098.5346.3.camel@jzny2> <1142470323.17608.341.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <1142472481.5417.20.camel@jzny2> <1142476647.17608.394.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <1142478478.5417.46.camel@jzny2> <1142488027.17608.485.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <1142517116.5417.137.camel@jzny2> <1142551481.17608.589.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> <1142606049.5322.89.camel@jzny2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl Return-path: To: hadi@cyberus.ca In-Reply-To: <1142606049.5322.89.camel@jzny2> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lartc-bounces@mailman.ds9a.nl Errors-To: lartc-bounces@mailman.ds9a.nl List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 09:34 -0500, jamal wrote: > If you are unable to do this then I will. I just dont have time until this > Sunday. > I will not respond to any further emails which do not contain data - instead > I am going to produce mine. After that wrist-slap I spent some time putting together some data. I am still not really sure what you are after, so if this isn't it please let me know: http://ace-host.stuart.id.au/russell/files/tc/hash-analysis/ One other thing: I have made a rather embarrassing error earlier. When I computed my metric's I posted earlier about 2.4 and 2.6, I emulated the 2.6 hash incorrectly. If it has of been correct, rather than showing a landside win for 2.4, it would of shown that 2.6 was slightly better.