[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAVq3rmgzL4Hg__dSkmEM75ZHuEsebE1D4ko-viSEggcYdrPjw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 22:56:10 -0500
From: yan cui <ccuiyyan@...il.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: dynamic TCP algorithms switching
Thanks for the quick reply!
Do you have the real-world workload results that demonstrate
that cubic has the best performance among all the available congestion
algorithms? If so, could you please post some?
Thanks, Yan
2013/11/22 Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>:
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 18:21:12 -0500
> yan cui <ccuiyyan@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> Then, why include so many (current Linux has 10+ TCP congestion algorithms)
>> algorithms? For users who want to deploy their application on Linux
>> and if the applications
>> are system resource intensive, they always want to tune the
>> configurations of the operating systems for the last piece of
>> performance. If they do so, maybe they are confused
>> about which TCP congestion algorithm to use for their environment. So,
>> the only way is to try each algorithm one by one. I understand the
>> setting of the default TCP congestion
>> algorithm to be Cubic means that it works well for most environments.
>> But if others
>> are seldom used, or can be replace with another implementation.
>> Why not just remove from the kernel?
>>
>> Yan
>
> Most are intended for research and testing only.
> Only a few are worth considering in a production environment.
> That is also why there so many qdisc algorithms as well.
>
--
Think big; Dream impossible; Make it happen.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists