[LEDE-DEV] RFC: Throughput testing results.
David Lang
david at lang.hm
Fri May 6 12:26:43 PDT 2016
On Fri, 6 May 2016, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 05/06/2016 12:05 PM, David Lang wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 May 2016, Ben Greear wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/06/2016 10:20 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>>>> Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> I am interested in feedback on the testing output. My goal is to add a
>>>>> few more different hardware configurations and then do nightly (or at
>>>>> least weekly) tests.
>>>>
>>>> So that is showing up to 10s of *seconds* of latency, right? (I'm not
>>>> sure I'm reading the units right).
>>>
>>> Yes, 10 seconds of latency. My traffic generator is using pfifo-fast,
>>> RENO, and default socket sizes, so it can be at least part of the problem.
>>
>> That's so much latency that you may as well be down.
>>
>> Please look at the make-wifi-fast mailing list and the tests that are being
>> done there. they show latency spikes as well as throughput, and show how it
>> is very
>> possible to get low latency without affecting throughput (in some cases,
>> throughput actually increases)
>
> I understand that. My test case is fairly abusive, and my generator is not
> optimized for
> low-latency at this time.
>
> In many cases, throughput does go down though, so I have been slow to try the
> buffer bloat stuff. I can run some tests with codel enabled sometime soon.
>
> I can also run my capacity test with UDP only. That might be better for pure
> throughput testing. My hope is to be able to show regressions/improvements
> over time as LEDE changes...
This is a good idea, but it is going to be very specific to the exact setup you
use for the testing. Use different hardware, or add/remove nodes from the test
(or have someone nearby create additional noise) and you can end up with very
different results.
I think it would be a bad idea to setup something that encourages chasing
benchmarks. I agree it's a good idea to watch out for regressions. The hard
thing is doing the latter without the former :-)
David Lang
More information about the Lede-dev
mailing list