On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:06:26PM +0200, Mikko Rauhala wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 03, 2003, jw schultz wrote:
> > Just how magic is the 1024? To what was bwlimit set? And
> > the MTU?
>
> The 1024 is very magic, I just pulled it out of my hat and 'lo, it
> worked well enough so I didn't touch it.
I'm glad i asked. That isn't magic at all. That is
arbitrary. Magic would be a number that if changed wouldn't
be nearly as effective and implies that you don't know why.
> I've usually used bwlimits of
> 4-12 depending on the time of day (expected available bandwidth in the
> neighbourhood) and my other traffic. MTU is 1500, but I'm not certain if
> the cable modem splits packages into smaller pieces than that for
> forwarding. I suspect not, though.
>
> > You do bring up an interesting point. I could see
> > restricting the write to bwlimit/100. Sleeping much longer
> > than 100ms is a bit crude.
>
> Tying the maximum amount to write to bwlimit sounds like a workable, a
> bit more general idea.
Yes but i'd like to hear from some people who know network
performance programming.
--
________________________________________________________________
J.W. Schultz Pegasystems Technologies
email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remember Cernan and Schmitt
--
To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
