[LEDE-DEV] RFC: Throughput testing results.

[Dave Taht]

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com> 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 did some tcp/udp mix, tcp only, udp only download tests, with fq_codel and
> fifo-fast on the traffic
> generator.  AP was un-changed, seems LEDE uses fq_codel by default.
> Generator is using 4.4.8+ kernel, and it looks
> like fq_codel works nicely!

I have *no idea* what I'm looking at here:

http://www.candelatech.com/examples/ventana/ventana-tcp-codel-dl_1462569548/chart-2.png

60 stations and 4sec latency?

> http://www.candelatech.com/examples/ventana/
>
> We'll run some tests on some of our higher-performing APs and see if
> fq_codel works well there
> too when we get a chance....
>
> Thanks,
> Ben
>
> --
> Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com>
> Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com
>



-- 
Dave Täht
Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
http://blog.cerowrt.org