Tor client performance
Olaf Selke
olaf.selke at blutmagie.de
Mon May 10 14:21:24 UTC 2010
Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 08:21:15PM +0200, Olaf Selke wrote:
>> Roger Dingledine schrieb:
>>> Take a look at
>>> http://metrics.torproject.org/torperf-graphs.html
>> how can one explain the leap in latency two weeks ago?
>
> That one's easy. We tried turning on the new "CircPriorityHalflifeMsec"
> feature, which gives priority to cells from circuits that haven't sent
> much lately. But there was a bug in parsing it from the consensus, which
> caused relays to pick totally the wrong cells, starve some circuits, etc.
> Bad news. So a week or so later we fixed the bug, and turned off the
> feature.
>
> The question I can't answer is "how can one explain the continued horrible
> latency even after you turned circpriorityhalflifemsec off?"
is blutmagie exit used for latency measurement? I'm not sure about the
increase in latency being related to my futile attempts reducing the
number of tcp sessions in mid of April. But maybe recent decrease might
be related to blutmagie hardware upgrade at 5th May. The heavily loaded
dual core cpu has been replace by a now moderately loaded quad core.
Besides that it provides some more bandwidth with less load on each
core. Pls have a look at http://metrics.torproject.org/torperf-graphs.html
According torperf data from
http://metrics.torproject.org/csv/torperf.csv latency started to drop
5th May:
source date q1 md q3
torperf-50kb 02.05.2010 7735 13092 20525
torperf-50kb 03.05.2010 9254 14550 20619
torperf-50kb 04.05.2010 7810 12498 20961
torperf-50kb 05.05.2010 6459 9848 15739
torperf-50kb 06.05.2010 4852 8069 14107
torperf-50kb 07.05.2010 4012 6036 10384
torperf-50kb 08.05.2010 3859 6080 9807
torperf-50kb 09.05.2010 3733 5766 9492
torperf-50kb 10.05.2010 3417 5073 6876
Was it me?
regards Olaf
More information about the tor-relays
mailing list