Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759690Ab0GQBX7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:23:59 -0400 Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:46642 "EHLO mail-qy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759618Ab0GQBX5 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:23:57 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=VMegZR3yXMLiVl4/t9KyZ5drl2vhieJECqbcvCUCfLUwDCdNC9ETv2Cf+mxJ5OmE61 pLZs5FoJBfC2tCyylduzEXEBh7MSTPZDvaDPvclU5pCjgROh2bHsiZw50/RZ7QFq83Yb lmBuoA5tCmo1JRT0m+M2uQFSCZLQnh7SLqhE8= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4C4099D6.6020305@wildgooses.com> References: <4C3D94E3.9080103@wildgooses.com> <4C3DD5EB.9070908@tmr.com> <20100714.111553.104052157.davem@davemloft.net> <1279299709.2156.5814.camel@tng> <4C4099D6.6020305@wildgooses.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 18:23:56 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Raise initial congestion window size / speedup slow start? From: "H.K. Jerry Chu" To: Ed W Cc: Patrick McManus , David Miller , davidsen@tmr.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3270 Lines: 73 On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Ed W wrote: > >> and while I'm asking for info, can you expand on the conclusion >> regarding poor cache hit rates for reusing learned cwnds? (ok, I admit I >> only read the slides.. maybe the paper has more info?) >> > > My guess is that this result is specific to google and their servers? > > I guess we can probably stereotype the world into two pools of devices: > > 1) Devices in a pool of fast networking, but connected to the rest of the > world through a relatively slow router > 2) Devices connected via a high speed network and largely the bottleneck > device is many hops down the line and well away from us > > I'm thinking here 1) client users behind broadband routers, wireless, 3G, > dialup, etc and 2) public servers that have obviously been deliberately > placed in locations with high levels of interconnectivity. > > I think history information could be more useful for clients in category 1) > because there is a much higher probability that their most restrictive > device is one hop away and hence affects all connections and relatively > occasionally the bottleneck is multiple hops away. ?For devices in category > 2) it's much harder because the restriction will usually be lots of hops > away and effectively you are trying to figure out and cache the speed of > every ADSL router out there... ?For sure you can probably figure out how to > cluster this stuff and say that pool there is 56K dialup, that pool there is > "broadband", that pool is cell phone, etc, but probably it's hard to do > better than that? > > So my guess is this is why google have had poor results investigating cwnd > caching? Actually we have investigated two type of caches, a short-history limited size internal cache that is subject to some LRU replacement policy hence much limiting the cache hit rate, and a long-history external cache, which provides much more accurate cwnd history per subnet but with high complexity and deployment headache. Also we have set out for a much more ambitious goal, to not just speed up our own services, but also provide a solution that could benefit the whole web (see http://code.google.com/speed/index.html). The latter pretty much precludes a complex external cache scheme mentioned above. Jerry > > However, I would suggest that whilst it's of little value for the server > side, it still remains a very interesting idea for the client side and the > cache hit ratio would seem to be dramatically higher here? > > > I haven't studied the code, but given there is a userspace ability to change > init cwnd through the IP utility, it would seem likely that relatively > little coding would now be required to implement some kind of limited cwnd > caching and experiment with whether this is a valuable addition? ?I would > have thought if you are only fiddling with devices behind a broadband router > then there is little chance of you "crashing the internet" with these kind > of experiments? > > Good luck > > Ed W > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/