From: Arnd Hannemann <hannemann@nets.rwth-aachen.de>
To: Andreas Petlund <apetlund@simula.no>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"shemminger@vyatta.com" <shemminger@vyatta.com>,
"ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi" <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] net: TCP thin linear timeouts
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:11:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AE9BEC8.6020108@nets.rwth-aachen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <07CD1135-C68B-4264-8CD3-C4BC0400FDA2@simula.no>
Andreas Petlund schrieb:
> We have found no noticeable degradation of the goodput in a series of
> experiments we have performed in order to map the effects of the
> modifications. Furthermore, the modifications implemented in the patches
> are explicitly enabled only for applications where the developer knows
> that streams will be thin, thus only a small subset of the streams will
> apply the modifications.
>
> Graphs presenting results from experiments performed to analyse latency
> and fairness issues can be found here:
> http://folk.uio.no/apetlund/lktmp/
How often did you hit consecutive RTOs in these measurements?
As I see you did a measurement with 512 thick vs. 512 thin streams.
Lets do a hypothetical calculation with only 512 "thin" streams.
Lets further assume the rtt is low, so that RTO is around 200ms.
Assume each segment has 128 Bytes (already very small...).
Assume after a period of normal operation all streams are in
timeout-based loss recovery. (e.g. because destination endpoint
suddenly behaves like a black hole)
As all streams are in timeout-based loss recovery, each stream
will transmit 5 segments each second with your modification.
This would result in a throughput around 512*5*1024bit = 2560 kbit/s
and a goodput of 0 kbit/s (because the receiver is a black hole).
So you can easily saturate a 2 MBit/s link, only with retransmissions.
Unfortunately in Germany an ADSL uplink of 786 kbit/s is still quite
common, and its already called "broadband"...
Regarding the "small subset", why have a global sysctl option, then?
And I think "tcp_stream_is_thin(tp)" will be true for every flow
in the RTO case, at least for consecutive RTOs.
Best regards,
Arnd Hannemann
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-29 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-27 16:31 [PATCH 2/3] net: TCP thin linear timeouts Andreas Petlund
2009-10-27 16:56 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-28 12:58 ` Arnd Hannemann
2009-10-28 14:31 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2009-10-29 13:51 ` Andreas Petlund
2009-10-29 14:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-29 17:01 ` Rick Jones
[not found] ` <07CD1135-C68B-4264-8CD3-C4BC0400FDA2@simula.no>
2009-10-29 16:11 ` Arnd Hannemann [this message]
2009-10-28 3:20 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-10-29 13:50 ` Andreas Petlund
2009-10-28 14:18 ` Ilpo Järvinen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-10-29 15:14 apetlund
2009-10-29 15:19 apetlund
2009-10-29 15:43 apetlund
2009-10-29 15:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-29 20:52 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2009-10-29 16:54 apetlund
2009-10-30 10:48 apetlund
2009-10-30 17:33 ` Rick Jones
2009-10-30 18:11 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-11-05 13:37 ` Andreas Petlund
2009-10-30 15:27 apetlund
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=4AE9BEC8.6020108@nets.rwth-aachen.de \
--to=hannemann@nets.rwth-aachen.de \
--cc=apetlund@simula.no \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@vyatta.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).