[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-bugs] #4086 [Analysis]: Compare performance of TokenBucketRefillInterval params in simulated network

#4086: Compare performance of TokenBucketRefillInterval params in simulated
network
-------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
 Reporter:  arma                     |          Owner:       
     Type:  task                     |         Status:  new  
 Priority:  normal                   |      Milestone:       
Component:  Analysis                 |        Version:       
 Keywords:  performance flowcontrol  |         Parent:  #4465
   Points:                           |   Actualpoints:       
-------------------------------------+--------------------------------------

Comment(by arma):

 Replying to [comment:6 robgjansen]:
 > '''Bulk performance''': Time to first byte improves when scheduling with
 EWMA, but does not improve when scheduling with RR. This is mostly because
 RR is outperforming EWMA quite significantly to begin with. Similarly,
 time to last byte only improves when scheduling with EWMA, but actually
 hurts performance when scheduling with RR. Again, RR appears to beat out
 EWMA for bulk clients.

 Rob: how do you say that "RR appears to beat out EWMA for bulk clients"
 when slide 4 of refill-perf-ewma0 shows that refilling once per second is
 best, and slide 4 of refill-perf-ewma30 shows that refilling once per
 second is worst? It seems your graphs show that if we're going to refill
 more than once a second then the bulk clients are better off with EWMA.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/4086#comment:13>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs