On 16 May 2016 at 11:12, David Lang <da...@lang.hm> wrote: > On Mon, 16 May 2016, Roman Yeryomin wrote: > >> On 6 May 2016 at 22:43, Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Roman Yeryomin <leroi.li...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 6 May 2016 at 21:43, Roman Yeryomin <leroi.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 6 May 2016 at 15:47, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <bro...@redhat.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >> >>> That is too low a limit, also, for normal use. And: >>> for the purpose of this particular UDP test, flows 16 is ok, but not >>> ideal. >> >> >> I played with different combinations, it doesn't make any >> (significant) difference: 20-30Mbps, not more. >> What numbers would you propose? > > > How many different flows did you have going at once? I believe that the > reason for higher numbers isn't for throughput, but to allow for more flows > to be isolated from each other. If you have too few buckets, different flows > will end up being combined into one bucket so that one will affect the other > more.
I'm testing with one flow, I never saw bigger performance with more flows (e.g. -P8 to iperf3). Regards, Roman _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
