For an accurate port to port latency estimate, you would need to go with something like a DAG card. Then you can get an accurate port to port measurement to double check the measurements on the Click box itself.
Roman Latency Buster wrote: >> Do you really care about latency? Or just overall performance (which is >> limited by the sum of the per-element latency)? > > In the end I care about port to port latency which is the sum across > all the elements. However, I would like to get a feel of the most time > consuming element in the path so that I can tweak it for the last > drop. > >> Are these packets unique already? or is expensive_uniquify being called? > No expensive uniquify calls. Checksum check is false too. > > I have taken the measurements when the mappings have been installed. > i.e - at least one packet of the flow was seen. I have used user level > click with file being read using FromDump() and did a performance > measurement - that figure comes to less than 20us. The kernel level > version of click with live traffic should at least beat that figure. > > I think I will do a oprofile measurement and see how the cycles are > being consumed. In the meantime, if you guys think that there is a > better/different approach to break down the latency that woule be very > much appreciated. > _______________________________________________ > click mailing list > [email protected] > https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click > _______________________________________________ click mailing list [email protected] https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
