Hey,
When using the "iperf3" class in shaker for looking at UDP small packet
performance, we see that as we scale up the concurrency the average PPS
goes up and also the loss % increases. Is the loss % a percentage of the
PPS or does the PPS only represent successful transmissions? Thanks!
--
Sa
Hello,
I'm looking to shaker capabilities and I'm wondering if this kind
of accomodation (see attachment also) can be achieved
Ascii (flat) version :
CN1 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN2 (2n VMs)
CN1 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN3 (2n VMs)
CN2 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN3 (2n VMs)
In this situation conc
Hi Sai,
In UDP testing PPS represents packets sent by iperf client to server. Loss
is the percentage of packets that were not received by server (more
specifically the server tracks packets and sums gaps between of them,
https://github.com/esnet/iperf/blob/3.0.7/src/iperf_udp.c#L64).
While report
Thanks Ilya!
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Ilya Shakhat wrote:
> Hi Sai,
>
> In UDP testing PPS represents packets sent by iperf client to server. Loss
> is the percentage of packets that were not received by server (more
> specifically the server tracks packets and sums gaps between of them,
Hi Matt,
Out of the box Shaker doesn't support such topology.
It shouldn't be hard to implement though. Let me check what needs to be
done.
Thanks,
Ilya
2016-11-24 13:49 GMT+03:00 Matthieu Simonin :
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking to shaker capabilities and I'm wondering if this kind
> of accomodation
Ilya Shakhat"
> À: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>
> Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Novembre 2016 13:03:33
> Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [Performance][shaker]
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> Out of the box Shaker doesn't support such topology.
> It
enstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Novembre 2016 13:03:33
> > Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [Performance][shaker]
> >
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > Out of the box Shaker doesn't support such topology.
> > It shouldn't be hard to impleme
- Mail original -
> De: "Ilya Shakhat"
> À: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>
> Envoyé: Mardi 6 Décembre 2016 14:39:28
> Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [Performance][shaker] Triangular topology
>
> Hi Matt,
>
&