headers
Matthew Hawkins | 1 Oct 2003 01:10
Picon

Re: [clug] Decent video cards


Brad Hards said:
[nothing but a non-compliant pgp mime attachment...again...]

If you don't like Cougar, stroll around the corner to techwarehouse
(www.techwarehouse.com.au) and talk to Rocco (if he's still there ;)
As far as video cards go, you won't get any decent amount of hardware
accelleration without binary-only drivers as the manufacturers want to
pretend to keep their so-called trade secrets.  Matrox got popular with
offering dual-head (and quad-head) support, so dual-head is standard now
on most Nvidia and ATI offerings.  If I were to buy a new video card right
now I'd get an ATI Radeon 9[7/8]00, they blow Nvidias out of the water. 
Nice to see ATI taking 3D seriously.  Matrox simply don't have the 3D
power.  It's good enough to get by, but nowhere near good enough for
serious modelling or gaming.  There's really no-one else in the market,
not price-competitive anyway (3Dlabs are far too expensive).
Personally I don't think its worth buying anything thats not current, it
simply won't last as long particularly when you're looking at Doom 3
making a Radeon 9700 Pro crawl.  That's scary.  But of course its your
budget and your requirements that'll drive what you get.  A smaller Radeon
like a 9300 is ridiculously cheap and some may argue "good enough".  I
wouldn't go for any Radeon smaller than that though (and remember a 9000
is pretty much a re-badged 8900...*shivers*)
I was looking at the local Itanic and Opteron offerings, you can get the
small ones at a decent price but I'm going to wait a bit, firstly because
I still haven't researched the AMD and Intel 64-bit tech enough to make a
really informed purchase and secondly because the prices will come down
eventually ;)  They've only just come onto the market here so its probably
best to wait till consumer demand forces a decent price.From what I've seen the AMD chips are better
(surprise surprise) but its
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
grail | 1 Oct 2003 01:27
Picon
Gravatar

[clug] Emitting Source Quench When Queues Are Full?

I'm trying to set up some "advanced" (for me, anyway) routing on some of
my machines (Linux 2.4.21, with all the standard kernel QoS stuff
enabled), and I'm trying to figure out how to go about emitting a source
quench ICMP message to a host that is using what I (or my routing rules)
consider to be an "unfair" amount of bandwidth.
Dropping packets is not an option - by the time the router gets the
packet, the data is already paid for. If the router ends up dropping
packets using any of the RED style ingres filters, I'm wasting time and
money (it's only a 33kbps link, after all!).  I'd much prefer to be able
to send source quench packets when my queues approach say 50% or 75%
capacity. An extra ICMP message or two is much cheaper than dropping
data-laden packets (African *or* European).
I've tried Google, and it gives me lots of pages describing what a Source
Quench message *is*, but nothing I've found (not even on LARTC!) gives me
any indication of whether it's possible to do what I want to do.
Ultimately, I'd like to be able to send source quench messages to each
source whose packets end up in the queue that is getting filled up too
fast. This could be one of my local hosts uploading a large file (ie: I
want to slow it down so that my router's memory doesn't fill up too fast,
and so that other users on my network get fair access to the 'net), or a
local host downloading a large file (ie: I want to slow down the remote
host without dropping packets).
I've tried pushing ACK packets onto queues that have lower priority (so
the ACKS go to the end of the queue, behind interactive and bulk), but
that ends up causing retransmission (could be just my bad queue design).
To me, duplicated data-laden packets are just as expensive as dropped
data-laden packets.
Can anyone point me at documentation that answers my question, or an
alternate mailing list where it would make more sense to ask this
question?
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Matthew Hawkins | 1 Oct 2003 01:50
Picon

Re: [clug] Emitting Source Quench When Queues Are Full?


> I'm trying to set up some "advanced" (for me, anyway) routing on some
> of my machines (Linux 2.4.21, with all the standard kernel QoS stuff
> enabled), and I'm trying to figure out how to go about emitting a
> source quench ICMP message to a host that is using what I (or my
> routing rules) consider to be an "unfair" amount of bandwidth.

Why not configure your QoS stuff (with tc, etc) to shape your bandwidth
the way you need it?  ICMP source quench is a little pointless when some
old legacy systems like Microsoft Windows ignores it and continues
flooding you.
--

-- 
Matt
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Chris Pilkington | 1 Oct 2003 05:17
Picon
Favicon

Re: [clug] Decent video cards

I would have thought all you Linux people would build your computers from 
scratch, out of parts from the computer fair (Cheapest).  I find Unix/Linux 
harder than putting together computers, but then, I only have a few years 
experience in Linux and too many years experience in making computers.  It 
may just be me, but I prefer to save my money and put it all together 
myself.  Just have a go at putting it together yourself, it's easier than 
you probably think it is.

Just my two cents,
Chris

_________________________________________________________________
Chat via SMS. Simply send 'CHAT' to 1889918.  More info at  
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/MoChat.asp?blipid=6800
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Damien Elmes | 1 Oct 2003 05:27

Re: [clug] Decent video cards

"Chris Pilkington" <pilch84@...> writes:

> I would have thought all you Linux people would build your computers
> from scratch, out of parts from the computer fair (Cheapest).  I find
> Unix/Linux harder than putting together computers, but then, I only
> have a few years experience in Linux and too many years experience in
> making computers.  It may just be me, but I prefer to save my money
> and put it all together myself.  Just have a go at putting it together
> yourself, it's easier than you probably think it is.

I don't think anyone mentioned buying pre-built computers. I tend to
prefer online retailers, because if you shop around you can find
prices close to that of the markets, and it's more convenient and
easier to chase up a warranty claim. But if there's a markets on
around the time I need to purchase something, it's worth going along.
I haven't had any problems with gear I've gotten there.

Be well,
--

-- 
Damien Elmes
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
wkomar | 1 Oct 2003 06:26
Picon

[clug] Re: Decent video cards (Wal Komar)

> On 30 Sep 2003, Damien Elmes <clug@...> wrote:
>
>> Have you considered any other local providers, or ordering from
>> interstate?
>
> Do you have any recommendations?
>
> --
> Martin

I find the best place to order interstate is www.gamedude.com.au always
has lowest prices if not cheapest of'em all.  and delivery is prompt with
COD.  Only other thing that compares is the computer markets.

good luck.

ps. im a mailing list noob, please don't hurt me.

WAL

--------------------------------------------------
           Sent from Code Fish Web Mail           
           Code Fish - Fishing for clues          
           http://www.codefish.net.au             
--------------------------------------------------
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Sam Couter | 1 Oct 2003 10:39
Picon

Re: [clug] Emitting Source Quench When Queues Are Full?

grail@... <grail <at> goldweb.com.au> wrote:
> I've tried pushing ACK packets onto queues that have lower priority (so
> the ACKS go to the end of the queue, behind interactive and bulk), but
> that ends up causing retransmission (could be just my bad queue design).

Retransmission will also cause the sending TCP stack to back off. Is
this not the goal?
--

-- 
Sam "Eddie" Couter  |  mailto:sam@...
Debian Developer    |  mailto:eddie@...
                    |  jabber:sam@...
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Rasjid Wilcox | 1 Oct 2003 11:53

Re: [clug] Decent video cards


On Wednesday 01 October 2003 13:27, Damien Elmes wrote:
> "Chris Pilkington" <pilch84@...> writes:
> > I would have thought all you Linux people would build your computers
> > from scratch, out of parts from the computer fair (Cheapest).  I find
> > Unix/Linux harder than putting together computers, but then, I only
> > have a few years experience in Linux and too many years experience in
> > making computers.  It may just be me, but I prefer to save my money
> > and put it all together myself.  Just have a go at putting it together
> > yourself, it's easier than you probably think it is.
>
> I don't think anyone mentioned buying pre-built computers. I tend to
> prefer online retailers, because if you shop around you can find
> prices close to that of the markets, and it's more convenient and
> easier to chase up a warranty claim. But if there's a markets on
> around the time I need to purchase something, it's worth going along.
> I haven't had any problems with gear I've gotten there.

I put together my current desktop from parts from a computer fair, and it was 
substantially cheaper than buying a pre-made system (even from the fairs).  
However, I have had two components play up or die.  Firstly, the power-switch 
on the case partly broke - not enough to be a problem, just enough to feel 
wrong and tacky.  Secondly, the memory was dodgy.  Initially not enough to be 
obvious - but just enough to cause random system crashes for 'no apprarent 
reason'.  Several months later the memory died sufficiently to render my 
machine unbootable - and I then worked out why it had been acting a little 
strange for so many months.

I never got around to trying to chase up the vendor I bought the memory from.  
It just seemed like way too much work for potentially very little gain.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Alex Satrapa | 1 Oct 2003 12:56
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [clug] Emitting Source Quench When Queues Are Full?

On Wednesday, October 1, 2003, at 09:50 , Matthew Hawkins wrote:

> Why not configure your QoS stuff (with tc, etc) to shape your bandwidth
> the way you need it?  ICMP source quench is a little pointless when some
> old legacy systems like Microsoft Windows ignores it and continues
> flooding you.

The QoS stuff ultimately ends up dropping packets in order to force the 
remote end to slow down.

ECN breaks stuff (since many routers interpret ECN-enabled packets as 
having invalid ToS fields). I wonder if I can selectively disable ECN 
for certain connections... or even certain routes?  Hmm.

I'm hoping that enough stuff out there will honour source quench, so 
that I don't end up having to drop packets. My windows boxen will be 
collecting most of their downloads through a proxy server, which is 
running a real operating system (Linux for now, *BSD when I start 
getting adventurous), so source quench *will* work, if I can figure out 
how to get the SQ messages onto the wire automagically.

I'd really like to be able to delay ACK packets "enough" to force the 
remote end to slow down too (ie: run out of xmit window) without 
retransmitting packets.

I'd prefer to try source-quench when the buffers become, say, 
half-full.  Then start dropping packets when the buffers get to 75% - 
most likely by reclassifying "bandwidth hogging" connections into a RED 
queue. I love the euphemism "Random Early Detection".  Dammit... the 
packet's made it 3/4 of the way around the world, only to be dropped at
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Rasjid Wilcox | 1 Oct 2003 14:26

Re: [clug] Decent video cards


On Tuesday 30 September 2003 21:16, Damien Elmes wrote:
> I don't have any dual head recommendations, other than the fact that I
> used to use it on a G400, and found it fun, but not very useful - I
> found myself constantly moving my head to see if there'd been action
> on the other screen.

On the other hand, I love a dual head arrangement.  I mainly wanted it so I 
could be coding on my main screen and have a browser on the second screen 
with online references to language foo.  But then I found it really useful 
when browsing the web and being able to view 2 website side by side etc.  And 
just in general I like the extra screenspace.

Cheers,

Rasjid.

--

-- 
Rasjid Wilcox
Canberra, Australia (UTC +10 hrs)
http://www.openminddev.net
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane