You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am having this awkward observation.
When specifying the "bucket_width" parameter to the default value I see a distortion in the results of a powstream measurement
If I remove the parameter and works, just fine, despite the fact, that the default value = the removed parameter is:
Without bucket-width
psmp-gn-mgmt-lon-uk:~$ pscheduler task latency --dest psmp-gn-owd-par-fr.geant.org --dest-node psmp-gn-mgmt-par-fr.geant.org --source psmp-gn-owd-lon-uk.geant.org --source-node psmp-gn-mgmt-lon-uk.geant.org --packet-count 100 --packet-interval 0.1 --packet-padding 0 --ip-version 4
Submitting task...
Task URL:
https://psmp-gn-mgmt-lon-uk.geant.org/pscheduler/tasks/039cf1a6-8bdc-40b1-a728-2058d45ff925
Running with tool 'owping'
Fetching first run...
Next scheduled run:
https://psmp-gn-mgmt-lon-uk.geant.org/pscheduler/tasks/039cf1a6-8bdc-40b1-a728-2058d45ff925/runs/1905a933-85a3-4c80-843c-de505a0bb55c
Starts 2024-06-12T09:17:40+00:00 (~2 seconds)
Ends 2024-06-12T09:18:02+00:00 (~21 seconds)
Waiting for result...
Packet Statistics
-----------------
Packets Sent ......... 100 packets
Packets Received ..... 100 packets
Packets Lost ......... 0 packets
Packets Duplicated ... 0 packets
Packets Reordered .... 0 packets
One-way Latency Statistics
--------------------------
Delay Median ......... 1.66 ms
Delay Minimum ........ 1.60 ms
Delay Maximum ........ 1.69 ms
Delay Mean ........... 1.66 ms
Delay Mode ........... 1.68 ms
Delay 25th Percentile ... 1.65 ms
Delay 75th Percentile ... 1.68 ms
Delay 95th Percentile ... 1.68 ms
Max Clock Error ...... 3.04 ms
Common Jitter Measurements:
P95 - P50 ........ 0.02 ms
P75 - P25 ........ 0.03 ms
Variance ......... 0.00 ms
Std Deviation .... 0.02 ms
Histogram:
1.60 ms: 1 packets
1.61 ms: 2 packets
1.62 ms: 11 packets
1.63 ms: 1 packets
1.64 ms: 9 packets
1.65 ms: 2 packets
1.66 ms: 28 packets
1.67 ms: 11 packets
1.68 ms: 33 packets
1.69 ms: 2 packets
TTL Statistics
--------------
TTL Median ........... 252.00
TTL Minimum .......... 252.00
TTL Maximum .......... 252.00
TTL Mean ............. 252.00
TTL Mode ............. 252.00
TTL 25th Percentile ... 252.00
TTL 75th Percentile ... 252.00
TTL 95th Percentile ... 252.00
Histogram:
252: 100 packets
No further runs scheduled.
One other observation of the awkwardness is that MaDDash somehow compensates, but Grafana doesn't.
Meaning despite the skewed results... MaDDash somehow recognizes the issue parameter lack/existence and provides the correct results
Below you'll see despite the change in the depth parameter MaDDash doesn't recognize the issue
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Isn't there some calculation happening in MaDDash? And/or a need to have the packet-intertval and bucket-width parameters aligned somehow? The difference between the first and second results seems to be a 10-fold decrease.
As suspected this is a display issue. I was able to recreate in my testbed. The problem was both in CLI and Grafana as neither was accounting for bucket-width when working with histogram or derived values. The histogram buckets are stored in Opensearch with the bins sized according to the bucket width (default .001) which is what is desired. Grafana and the CLI were just slapping a ms label on whatever came out without consideration for bucket width. I have updated both to look for the bucket width and scale values accordingly so they are always normalized to milliseconds.
Hi guys,
I am having this awkward observation.
When specifying the "bucket_width" parameter to the default value I see a distortion in the results of a powstream measurement
If I remove the parameter and works, just fine, despite the fact, that the default value = the removed parameter is:
One other observation of the awkwardness is that MaDDash somehow compensates, but Grafana doesn't.
Meaning despite the skewed results... MaDDash somehow recognizes the issue parameter lack/existence and provides the correct results
Below you'll see despite the change in the depth parameter MaDDash doesn't recognize the issue
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: