Pie has a default latency target of 20ms, fq codel 5ms. (But the fq code target matters less as the target only applies to queue building flows)
A packet takes 13ms to transit the device at 1mbit. There is a change to fq codel in this release that should make fiddling with target a low speeds less needed. (But might have other problems) Still a comparison at roughly the same target vs a vs pie in your environment would be very interesting. I suggested 25ms as a test (as pie never makes 20ms anyway) I came close to inserting a simple formula to start increasing the target below 4mbit in this release. On Dec 27, 2013 11:25 AM, "Sebastian Moeller" <moell...@gmx.de> wrote: > > Hi Fred, > > you could try to put "target 25ms" without the quotes into the advanced egress options field in the "Queue Discipline" tab, that is exposed after checking "Show Dangerous Configuration". I would love to hear whether that worked or not (I am not able to test anything myself). Maybe posting the output of "tc -d qdisc" and "tc class show dev ge00" would help. Good luck… > > > Best Regards > Sebastian > > > On Dec 27, 2013, at 20:20 , Fred Stratton <fredstrat...@imap.cc> wrote: > > > I have been using pie for approximately 3 weeks. > > > > You are correct, in that the outbound speed is about 800 - 900 kb/s. > > > > I shall try what you suggest, but do not know how to express the target of 25 ms as a configuration option. > > > > > > On 27/12/13 19:15, Dave Taht wrote: > >> Dear fred: are you sticking with pie? I was going to suggest you try fq codel with a target 25ms on your outbound. (You are at 800kbit or so as best I recall?) > >> > >> On Dec 27, 2013 11:10 AM, "Fred Stratton" <fredstrat...@imap.cc> wrote: > >> I upgraded to 3.10.24-8 on 2013-12-23. > >> > >> I modified /etc/fixdaemons, adding > >> /etc/init.d/sqm restart > >> > >> input the appropriate sqm settings, transcribed from aqm > >> > >> rebooted > >> > >> and the build works very well. For ADSL2+ here, it is the best so far. > >> > >> > >> On 27/12/13 18:55, Dave Taht wrote: > >>> A race condition appears to have crept in... > >>> > >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >>> From: "Dave Taht" <dave.t...@gmail.com> > >>> Date: Dec 27, 2013 10:47 AM > >>> Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] CeroWrt 3.10.24-8 badly bloated? > >>> To: "Richard E. Brown" <richb.hano...@gmail.com> > >>> Cc: > >>> > >>> Probably didn't start sqm properly > >>> > >>> Restart it by hand via /etc/init.d/sqm restart > >>> > >>> tc -s qdisc show dev ge00 > >>> > >>> Should show htb and fq codel. > >>> > >>> On Dec 27, 2013 10:36 AM, "Rich Brown" <richb.hano...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> So I screwed up my courage and replaced my 3.10.18-? firmware in my primary router with 3.10.24-8. That version had worked well as a secondary, so I figured, What the heck… Let’s give it try. > >>> > >>> The result was not pretty. I set my link speeds in the SQM page, chose the defaults for the Queue Discipline tab, and link layer to ATM with no additional overhead for my DSL link. > >>> > >>> Ping times to google are normally ~51-54 msec. But when I fired up speedtest.net, they jumped to 1500-2500 msec. Is there something I should look at before reverting? Thanks. > >>> > >>> Rich > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list > >>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list > >>> > >>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >
_______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
