Smoother bandwidth limiting

[Mikko Rauhala]

On Mon, Feb 03, 2003, jw schultz wrote:
> Just how magic is the 1024?  To what was bwlimit set?  And
> the MTU?

The 1024 is very magic, I just pulled it out of my hat and 'lo, it
worked well enough so I didn't touch it. I've usually used bwlimits of
4-12 depending on the time of day (expected available bandwidth in the
neighbourhood) and my other traffic. MTU is 1500, but I'm not certain if
the cable modem splits packages into smaller pieces than that for
forwarding. I suspect not, though.

> You do bring up an interesting point.  I could see
> restricting the write to bwlimit/100.  Sleeping much longer
> than 100ms is a bit crude.

Tying the maximum amount to write to bwlimit sounds like a workable, a
bit more general idea.

-- 
Mikko Rauhala   - mjr at iki.fi     - <URL:http://www.iki.fi/mjr/>
Transhumanist   - WTA member     - <URL:http://www.transhumanism.org/>
Singularitarian - SIAI supporter - <URL:http://www.singinst.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/attachments/20030204/fe622024/attachment.bin