On 16 November 2017 18:20:16 CET, "Dave Täht" <notifications@github.com> wrote:
>Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <notifications@github.com> writes:
>
>> Pete Heist <notifications@github.com> writes:
>>
>>> On the positive side(?), with irtt, I don't see the 'latency
>locking'
>>> effect that I see with netperf, where for whatever reason, certain
>>> flows would stay more fixed in some position relative to the mean.
>>> Also, in these runs, the download throughput was somewhat less with
>>> netperf, but not with irtt.
>>
>> Yeah, one of the issues with the netperf UDP_RR test is that it uses
>> more bandwidth the lower the latency, because it really measures
>> "transactions per second" which Flent then converts to RTT. That is
>> probably also the reason for the 'locking' behaviour...
>
>The rrul spec was for isochronous behavior. Would not mind a rrulv2
>test
>that did that using irtt.

I don't really see any reason to keep the netperf UDP_RR behaviour for anything other than a fallback. So once I'm done with the integration, RRUL would just switch to isochronous behaviour everywhere whenever irtt is available...

-Toke


-- 
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/tohojo/flent/issues/106#issuecomment-345009469