Working as Expected (Jul 13 2009)

As of approximately 1:30am UTC, it looks like there is a nice fat spike in uploaded (probably actually reported) results.

That's just Vistro and TCP Jesus/MC Hammer or whatever he decides to call himself this week pressing the retry button too many times.

Hey! Shame on you... Cynicism doesn't become you.

Hey! Shame on you... Cynicism doesn't become you.

Then you obviously don't know me very well, nor my sense of humor. Its ok, a lot of people don't get my sense of humor until they really get a chance to know me.

Just noticed that even though there was a download dip and upload spike in the graph that ML1 displayed, that when looking at the packets there is virtually no variation on the uploads.
img http://fragment1.berkeley.edu/newcricket/mini-graph.cgi?type=png;target=%2Frouter-interfaces%2Finr-250%2Fgigabitethernet2_3;inst=0;dslist=ifInUcastPackets%2CifOutUcastPackets;range=151200;rand=252 /img

Just noticed that even though there was a download dip and upload spike in the graph that ML1 displayed, that when looking at the packets there is virtually no variation on the uploads.
img http://fragment1.berkeley.edu/newcricket/mini-graph.cgi?type=png;target=%2Frouter-interfaces%2Finr-250%2Fgigabitethernet2_3;inst=0;dslist=ifInUcastPackets%2CifOutUcastPackets;range=151200;rand=252 /img

OUCH! That's a direct link to Cricket. Very antisocial...

I'll capture the latest graphs and link them to my hosting.

Interesting point there!

Note that there are many bits in a packet and so the packet numbers will be a ratio of the bit rate, assuming that the average packet size remains the same.

More musing...

Regards,
Martin

Aside:

If a live link is OK for Eric Korpela, I think we can survive one in Technical News - remember we're only using Campus bandwidth for the forums (and Cricket bandwidth for the actual semi-static* image), not getting in the way of the Hurricane Electric data. ...

* The cricket graphs only update once every four minutes, so the data-rate is much less than, say, streaming.

@ current server manage crew ;-)

Matt had let the UL/DL server ONLINE during the weekly maintenance.
Last week the UL server was OFFLINE.

If possible, let them ONLINE during the maintenance time.
It would help to UL stopped results.

____________


>Das Deutsche Cafe. The German Cafe.<

Aside:

If a live link is OK for Eric Korpela, I think we can survive one in Technical News - remember we're only using Campus bandwidth for the forums (and Cricket bandwidth for the actual semi-static* image), not getting in the way of the Hurricane Electric data. ...

* The cricket graphs only update once every four minutes, so the data-rate is much less than, say, streaming.

That assumes that Cricket doesn't get touched if the page is cached.

There's previous mention not to directly link to avoid loading the Cricket box. (Not a problem of bandwidth but more that Cricket is not administered by s@h and is supposedly for the benefit of on-campus users only. Abuse it, it will get switched off. [Mods comment here?])

In any case, a direct link is futility. Tomorrow, whatever you're trying to show will have scrolled off the side into oblivion.


Hence, just simply use a link to a static copy hosted somewhere else. Easy enough even for a complete non-webbie such as myself!

Cheers,
Martin

Just noticed that even though there was a download dip and upload spike in the graph that ML1 displayed, that when looking at the packets there is virtually no variation on the uploads. ...

... Interesting point there!

Note that there are many bits in a packet and so the packet numbers will be a ratio of the bit rate, assuming that the average packet size remains the same.

... And the bit rate and packet rate (x2 vertical scale) combined:



Note: Green = downlink, blue line = uplink.

(Note 2: Fixed plots. DO NOT LINK DIRECTLY TO CRICKET!)

Aside:

... Abuse it, it will get switched off. [Mods comment here?])

In any case, a direct link is futility. Tomorrow, whatever you're trying to show will have scrolled off the side into oblivion.

... you'll see a static Cricket image hosted off my Imageshack space, again precisely so that we could freeze a moment in time and study it. Been there, done that.

... Whilst I would not mind honouring a request from the Cricket Admins not to link their resource (though it would be a shame to lose it) ...

Have to say I wasn't aware of the request not to link directly, have been fairly busy lately, and not here as much as usual.

If it causes a problem could the mods remove the link.

I'm happy to hand the issue over to the mods for comment.

Meanwhile, the case in hand is the interesting interaction of downloads poisoning uploads... Your comment on that?

Just noticed that even though there was a download dip and upload spike in the graph that ML1 displayed, that when looking at the packets there is virtually no variation on the uploads.

OUCH! That's a direct link to Cricket. Very antisocial...

I'll capture the latest graphs and link them to my hosting.


Interesting point there!

Note that there are many bits in a packet and so the packet numbers will be a ratio of the bit rate, assuming that the average packet size remains the same.

More musing...

Regards,
Martin


Bit rate:




And the packet rate (x2 vertical scale):




And the bit rate and packet rate (x2 vertical scale) combined:



Note: Green = downlink, blue line = uplink.

(Note 2: Fixed plots. DO NOT LINK DIRECTLY TO CRICKET!)

Hey! Shame on you... Cynicism doesn't become you.

Then you obviously don't know me very well, nor my sense of humor. Its ok, a lot of people don't get my sense of humor until they really get a chance to know me.

Shame on you for missing my pun-ish humour and the pun on a few lines from an old Star Trek episode...

Is it that an Ameri(k)an UK divide/divergence?

;-)

I'm happy to hand the issue over to the mods for comment.

My quote - you've obviously noticed we're skating on thin ice here!

Meanwhile, the case in hand is the interesting interaction of downloads poisoning uploads... Your comment on that?

I've already posted my theory that when the link is less than saturated, a higher proportion of data packets, as opposed to administration packets, get through.

I'm happy to hand the issue over to the mods for comment.

Meanwhile, the case in hand is the interesting interaction of downloads poisoning uploads... Your comment on that?

I've already posted my theory that when the link is less than saturated, a higher proportion of data packets, as opposed to administration packets, get through.

Observation FWIW.

Several hours after the beginning of the Tuesday outage there was near zero download bandwidth in use and the usual 5 MBits/sec or so on the upload side from hosts trying work requests each hour. Packet rates were low both ways. I had as usual been running with Network activity disabled and had only 5 uploads ready to go, none had been tried. I enabled Network, BOINC tried and tried and tried, eventually one upload was successful before the backoffs became ridiculous.

The obvious conclusion is that saturated download isn't the only cause of difficult uploads. I wonder if the internal 1 GBit network might have been near saturation doing the database backup, and whether that part which is invisible to us may make most of our theorizing moot.

I'm happy to hand the issue over to the mods for comment.

I believe this was a current hot-button topic recently, and I believe Eric himself chimed in and said that it wasn't an issue linking to the cricket graph.