Hi Peter,
The only parameter of those mentioned below that would have any effect on 
congestion is TIPC_MAX_LINK_WIN, which should reduce occurrences of link level 
congestion.
However, you don't describe which symptoms you see caused by this congestion. 
- Is it only a higher 'congested'  counter when you look at the link 
statistics? If so, you don't have a problem at all, this is a totally normal 
and frequent occurrence. (Maybe we should have given this field a different 
name to avert confusion.)
- If this causes a severely reduced throughput you may have a problem, but I 
don't find that very likely. 
- If you are losing messages at the socket level (dropped because of receive 
buffer overflow) you *do* have a problem, but this can most often be remedied 
by extending the socket receive buffer limit.

BR
///Jon Maloy

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Koss <[email protected]> 
Sent: September 18, 2018 12:33 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [tipc-discussion] What affects congestion beyond window size, and what 
might have reduced congestion thresholds in TIPC 2.0.x?


In TIPC 1.7.6, we battled with congestion quite a bit.    We ultimately settled 
on adjusting these parameters in TIPC, which we also used in TIPC 1.7.7.  This 
was running on Wind River Linux 3, where TIPC was an independent module from 
the kernel.

SOL_TIPC                                          changed from 271 to 50.  
(probably not affecting congestion)
TIPC_MAX_LINK_WIN                   changed from 50 to 150
TIPC_NODE_RECVQ_DEPTH        set to 131

Using Wind River Linux 6, we get TIPC 2.0.5 as part of the kernel, and we see 
congestion at occurring at much lower overall load levels (less traffic 
overall), compared to TIPC 1.7.7 & WR3.   We've made the same changes as above 
via a loadable module for TIPC 2.0.5, and also noted that TIPC_NODE_RECVQ_DEPTH 
is now obsoleted.   Upon observing congestion, we have changed the default 
window size, and max window size, up to 300 and even 400.  This helps 
congestion a little bit, but not sufficiently.


Does anyone know:
-What has changed in TIPC 2.0.x that affects this?
-Are there other parameters to change, to assist this?
-Is there a replacement set of parameters that affect what 
TIPC_NODE_RECVQ_DEPTH influences?



This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely 
for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please 
notify so to the sender by e-mail and delete the original message. In such 
cases, please notify us immediately at [email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> . Further, you are not to copy, disclose, or 
distribute this e-mail or its contents to any unauthorized person(s). Any such 
actions are considered unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. Infinite has 
taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for 
any damage you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should 
carry out your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachments. 
Infinite reserves the right to monitor and review the content of all messages 
sent to or from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail 
address may be stored on the Infinite e-mail system.

 

***INFINITE******** End of Disclaimer********INFINITE********

_______________________________________________
tipc-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tipc-discussion


_______________________________________________
tipc-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tipc-discussion

Reply via email to