[Spread-users] groups and daemons

[John Schultz]

At the moment, I do not believe these parameters are exposed through the configuration file.

Cheers!

-----
John Lane Schultz
Spread Concepts LLC
Phn: 301 830 8100
Cell: 443 838 2200

On Nov 22, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Ed Holyat wrote:

Can this be adjusted through the spread configuration file (.conf)?

-----Original Message-----
From: Parisa [mailto:jalilimp at usi.ch] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 4:29 PM
To: John Schultz
Cc: spread-users at lists.spread.org
Subject: Re: [Spread-users] groups and daemons

Thanks, looks as if it is the solution :)
I can push the throughout further now.

P.



On Nov 22, 2011, at 9:59 PM, John Schultz wrote:

> I'm not sure what the bottleneck here is.
> 
> It could be the flow control parameters of your configuration are  
> too low to hit cpu and/or bandwidth limits.  You can change the flow  
> control parameters manually through the spmonitor program if you  
> have dangerous monitor turned on in your configuration file.  Out of  
> the box the window is 60 and the personal window is 15.  You could  
> try experimentally increasing these parameters by a multiplicative  
> factor and see if it improves your throughput (e.g. - 120 and 30).
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> -----
> John Lane Schultz
> Spread Concepts LLC
> Phn: 301 830 8100
> Cell: 443 838 2200
> 
> On Nov 22, 2011, at 3:39 PM, Parisa wrote:
> 
> Hi ,
> 
> I was testing the spread with the following setting:
> 
> one segment with 4 daemons. which are deployed on 4 different  
> machines.
> then each daemon has two flooders connected to it. one is a writer and
> the other is a reader. these flooders are also on different machines.
> 
> Then I have 4 groups. each pair of the flooders connected to that same
> daemon, form a group. Each writer only sends to its own group.
> 
> and I am testing with SAFE_MESS type.
> 
> The behavior I am observing looks a little strange to me. I am
> monitoring the cpu and bandwidth usage at the daemons during the
> execution. After a certain load which is close to 50 Mbps for each
> writer (which in aggregate we can say 200 Mbps) throughput does not
> increase any further. Though neither cpu nor the bandwidth at daemons
> and flooders is not saturated.
> 
> 
> Do you think I am doing sth wrong? Any suggestions why this should be
> the case?
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> Parisa
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spread-users mailing list
> Spread-users at lists.spread.org
> http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
> 



_______________________________________________
Spread-users mailing list
Spread-users at lists.spread.org
http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users


_______________________________________________
Spread-users mailing list
Spread-users at lists.spread.org
http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3805 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.spread.org/pipermail/spread-users/attachments/20111122/1d623b3b/attachment-0001.bin