search for: overheads

A bit more detail. I have the following htb classes set up... class htb 1:356 parent 1:4 leaf 356: prio 4 quantum 1600 rate 12800bit ceil 51680bit burst 15Kb/8 mpu 0b overhead 0b cburst 1663b/8 mpu 0b overhead 0b level 0 class htb 1:357 parent 1:4 leaf 357: prio 4 quantum 1600 rate 12800bit ceil 51680bit burst 15Kb/8 mpu 0b overhead 0b cburst 1663b/8 mpu 0b overhead 0b level 0 class htb 1:2 root

Hello, i have a htb setup where the root and (nearly) all child classes has a ceil rate with max up from my adsl line. But the root class don''t reach the ceil value but some childs are get a huge backlog. My setup: (tc -d class show dev ppp0) [cleaned a bit] ******************************************************** class htb 1:1 root rate 576000bit ceil 576000bit burst 30Kb/8 cburst

I know there is that handy patch available to very efficiently use ATM bandwidth, but I was wondering what the best values to use with a non-patched iproute2 would be. Anyone here care to check my logic in coming up with these numbers and perhaps suggest better values? My transmit speed is 768kbps per ADSL line (I have two). This is the HTB shaping I do on the interface (logic used for this

I have been trying to optimise my ADSL connections for VOIP. Funny things were happening - for example increasing the ping packet size by 50% had no effect, but then adding one byte had a major effect. It took me a while to figure out that I was seeing the effects of the fixed ATM cell size. This is probably obvious to some of you. For the rest: ADSL uses ATM as its transport. An ATM

According to the AppDB EU2 1.09 has a platinum rating, but it's constantly crashing on me. I installed the game from the CD, updated to the latest version (1.09), and the game launches just fine. When it gets into the menu I notice that it's running a lot slower than it should be. I can start a single player game and it still runs slow, and then crashes. It doesn't matter what I do in

Further pursuing my curiosity to measure the efficiency of R/C++ interface, I conducted a simple matrix-vector multiplication test using .C and .Call functions in R. In each case, I measured the execution time in R, as well as inside the C++ function. Subtracting the two, I came up with a measure of overhead associated with each call. I assume that this overhead would be non-existent of the entire

Does anyone have any recommendations for overhead paging systems for use with Asterisk? Thanks, Randy Johnson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20031113/82ae09ec/attachment.htm

Hi I''m using wondershaper like script. But noticed imperfect scheduling. By googling, I found some patches that takes the aal5 atm overhead in the scheduling algorithms. http://www.adsl-optimizer.dk/ADSL-optimizer/ Before trying it, has anyone tried these patches? they apply on 2.4.29 kernel and 2.6.9 TC. I use centos4 with a 2.6 kernel, so I can''t try these easily. Thanks

I've rummaged through the archives and documentation and have yet to find references to nbsd or mention of how to implement overhead paging using chan_oss as mentioned in the list previously. I suspect that one would use a soundcard in the PBX system and feed the output to speakers and/or PA system. Would someone please point me to some procedures or documentation to acomplish overhead paging?

Hi all, I have updated my GSoS proposal: "FastPolly: Reducing LLVM-Polly Compiling overhead" (https://gist.github.com/tanstar/5441808). I think the pass ordering problem you discussed early can be also investigated in this project! Is there any comment or advice about my proposal? I appreciate all your help and advice. Thanks, Star Tan Proposal:

On 04/26/2013 05:08 AM, tanmx_star wrote: > Hi all, Hi, thanks for the update and sorry for the delay in reviewing. I just had a look at your proposal. > I have updated my GSoS proposal: "FastPolly: Reducing LLVM-Polly Compiling overhead" (https://gist.github.com/tanstar/5441808). I think the pass ordering problem you discussed early can be also investigated in this project!

Hi. I wrote in a reply to a mail on here recently that you can''t set mpu (minimum packet unit) on HTB as you can on CBQ. I''ve just noticed that there is a patch on devik''s site which does mpu and overhead. http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/ For dsl users mpu is, for practical purposes going to be 106 - overhead is still variable though, depending on packet size.

Hello list, I need to realize a complicated custom shaping setup, and given very little experience with shaping I just can''t wrap my head around it. I am not seeking a complete script, I just need an idea/a set of pointers on how to best subdivide traffic accordingly to my needs, and which shapers to place on every leaf. I am very experienced with netfilter and have minor experience with

Hello Tobi, I am interested in Polly project. Polly seems to be a very promising tool to find out program parallelization based on LLVM infrastructure. However, I find that Polly analysis and optimization can consume significant compiling time, so I propose a GSoC project to reduce Polly compiling time and I hope my work can make the Polly tool more applicable for all LLVM users. I have done

Someone could tell me the question about the question about lacing values values of segments. I mean i know what happens about segmentation but reading ogg specs i didn't understand this lines: "We simply add the lacing values for the total size; the last lacing value for a packet is always the value that is less than 255. Note that this encoding both avoids imposing a maximum packet

Jon, I need to create a database of basics blocks and their execution time. The only thing I'm concerned is if a block A is more expensive than a block B. Do you think that even with the overhead I would be able to get the A > B information? Like: overhead + time(A) > overhead + time(B) => A > B. If so, I'm not too much concerned about the accuracy. Not sure if I was clear,

Hello!, i've just compared the 1.0.3 release with the master branch on a BeagleBone Black (AM335x 1GHz ARM Cortex-A8 with NEON floating-point accelerator) and Arch Linux ARM. At the moment I dont no why, but I see that 1.1 is much slower in encoding. Are there any default changes, that I missed and could explain this? Normaly I suggested a better performance with 1.1 and the ARM

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007, David Greene wrote: > Ah. Basically operator<< for FILE*. I don't see a lot of benefit to > redefining operator<< for every type just to avoid ostreams. The > problem isn't basic_ostream _per_se_. There are two issues we're > worried about: The problem is basic_ostream and the design of the whole iostreams library. Use of virtual base

Hello, after spending several hours reading archives, I decided to write new post. I successfully set up packet classification, made some basic HTB setup, made some simple graphical representation from HTB statistics data... BUT, I cannot figure out how to refine HTB to get this behaviour: I need that class "p2p" should be the last one to get some link capacity. If I set both RATE

Eric, I''ve attached the output from the command you requested below. I''m using kernel 2.6.17.12 and tc version ss060323. I''m have a nforce4 onboard giggabit controller using the forcedeth driver, if that makes a difference. Charlie, I''ll take a look at the Apache model for throttling, thanks. I was going for tc because was going to try to add additional