search

nikita21 / ndt

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/ndt
Other
0 stars 0 forks source link

Client send buffer is not considered and reported in the results when it is low. #17

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
What steps will reproduce the problem?

1. Connect server and client in a 1GBit Switch
2. Start both servers (fakewww and web100)
3. Set the following tcp paramters in both server and client.
    echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_moderate_rcvbuf
    echo 4194304 > /proc/sys/net/core/wmem_max
    echo 4194304 > /proc/sys/net/core/rmem_max
    echo "4096 65536 65536" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_rmem
    echo "4096 8912 8912" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_wmem
    echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_timestamps
    echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_window_scaling
    echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_sack
    echo "0" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn
4. Click the start button to start the test and wait till client complete
the test.
5. Check the statistics window.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
Since the send buffer is low in both server and client which are limiting
the throughput both should be reported but only server send buffer is
reported in the
statistics window, client send buffer problem not reported.

Please provide any additional information below.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by sekharn...@gmail.com on 27 Feb 2010 at 1:40

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by sekharn...@gmail.com on 27 Feb 2010 at 1:42

Attachments:

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Removing the 'Priority' tag and replacing with a 'Severity' tag.  Un-assigning 
QA team as owner of the bug.

Original comment by jwzuraw...@gmail.com on 1 Mar 2010 at 12:28

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by jwzuraw...@gmail.com on 10 Mar 2010 at 8:59

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Re-verified with V3.6.3 and this bug is not yet fixed. Tested with changing the 
buffer sizes at client only still the send buffer problem not reported.

Original comment by sekharn...@gmail.com on 10 Jun 2010 at 6:13