Re: Performance test for CUBIC in stable/14

The latency does not sound a problem to me. What is the performance of
TCP congestion control algorithm `newreno`?

In case you need to load `newreno` first.

cc@n1:~ % sudo kldload newreno

cc@n1:~ % sudo sysctl net.inet.tcp.cc.algorithm=newreno

net.inet.tcp.cc.algorithm: cubic -> newreno

cc@n1:~ %

And let me know the result of `newreno` vs. `cubic`, for example:
iperf3 -B ${src} --cport ${tcp_port} -c ${dst} -l 1M -t 20 -i 2 -VC newreno

cc

On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 4:13 PM void <void@f-m.fm> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 03:57:42PM -0400, Cheng Cui wrote:
> >What is the output from `ping` (latency) between these VMs?
>
> That test wasn't between VMs. It was from the vm with the patches to a
> workstation
> on the same switch.
>
> ping from the vm to the workstation:
>
> --- 192.168.1.232 ping statistics ---
> 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.643/0.796/0.870/0.070 ms
>
> ping from the vm with patches to an alpine linux vm on the same host:
>
> --- 192.168.1.65 ping statistics ---
> 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.734/0.859/0.963/0.073 ms
>
> --
>
>

-- 
Best Regards,
Cheng Cui