If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
MikeS wrote in news
On 13/12/2018 14:51, Tim wrote: Here's my setup: PC with AMD A10 5800 cpu and more memory than has ever been used. Internet is DSL modem/router (D2200D), feeding into the PC through a 100mbit com port. Is there a way that I can throttle a given program when it is downloading from the net? The reason I ask is that yesterday I was downloading the Win10 1809 ISO, and I basically could not access anything else on the net until that download finished. Is there someway I can partition the network and assign a given data stream only a percentage of the total bandwidth? I have never noticed the effect you describe even with several devices sharing an internet connection. Obviously they cannot all do a "full speed" download at the same time but when downloading something like a Windows iso it is possible to continue browsing etc without any great problem. This applies even without a super speed connection as the system shares out the bandwidth. That was not my experience. When the Windows ISO was downloading, it was using all available bandwidth. When I tried to access other web pages, most of the time Firefox would time out with unable to reach server. I am paying for 7mb/s, but the actual throughput usually measures 5.7mb/s, which is what was being taken up by the download. |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
Andy Burns wrote in news:g7fpk8F1bf6U1
@mid.individual.net: Tim wrote: I was downloading the Win10 1809 ISO, and I basically could not access anything else on the net until that download finished. what bufferbloat rating do you get from here? http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest I didn't notice. The next time I run speedtest I will check. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
mike wrote in news
On 12/13/2018 7:02 AM, nospam wrote: In article , Tim wrote: What happens when you google "download manager"? or "throttle downloads" https://www.guidingtech.com/45266/id...er-downloader/ Browsers typically let you pause downloads. But if you require continuous activity, that won't help. But I wasn't using a browser, I was using the standalone Windows Updater program. Do any of you know if Microsoft runs a bittorrent server? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
Tim wrote:
MikeS wrote in news On 13/12/2018 14:51, Tim wrote: Here's my setup: PC with AMD A10 5800 cpu and more memory than has ever been used. Internet is DSL modem/router (D2200D), feeding into the PC through a 100mbit com port. Is there a way that I can throttle a given program when it is downloading from the net? The reason I ask is that yesterday I was downloading the Win10 1809 ISO, and I basically could not access anything else on the net until that download finished. Is there someway I can partition the network and assign a given data stream only a percentage of the total bandwidth? I have never noticed the effect you describe even with several devices sharing an internet connection. Obviously they cannot all do a "full speed" download at the same time but when downloading something like a Windows iso it is possible to continue browsing etc without any great problem. This applies even without a super speed connection as the system shares out the bandwidth. That was not my experience. When the Windows ISO was downloading, it was using all available bandwidth. When I tried to access other web pages, most of the time Firefox would time out with unable to reach server. I am paying for 7mb/s, but the actual throughput usually measures 5.7mb/s, which is what was being taken up by the download. The web page is context sensitive. https://www.microsoft.com/en-ca/soft...load/windows10 The web page behaves differently for WinXP and Linux users. For those users, it offers a direct download of an ISO file. The file sits on the server, and you have 24 hours to fetch it before the folder on the server is deleted. This prevents people on USENET from "just posting a URL to the ISO" for others to use. When downloaded with WinXP or Linux, the browser will open only *one* connection, and the machine doing the download will be "fair" to the other machines. For a Vista+ user, Microsoft would be offered an executable like MediaCreationTool. It doesn't just download an ISO. It uses .NET, and the version of .NET used is too high for WinXP to be a candidate. There's a couple ways to build an image. You can download 2000 packages using parallel download connections, load them into a mounted file tree, convert them to a compressed WIM, then package the WIM file (in "Sources") on an ISO9660 image file. Using Process Monitor from Sysinternals, you can watch all WriteFile operations that are going on, during the MediaCreationTool operation and download. You might see the files arrive in a BITS folder area. The number of files open, the parallelism going on, can be analysed by taking a Process Monitor trace and analyzing it. ******* There are two ways for a download to "dominate" a router. If two computers share a router, and one computer starts a "big download" by opening one connection, it initially gets full rate. If the second computer does the same thing, they "naturally share". This is done by the router giving round robin servicing to the two computers 1-2-1-2-1 and so on. Neither machine is starved, the user is pretty tolerant of the behavior (user can "do the math" and understand. No machine starves with this pattern. If one machine opens 20 connections opening "package1", "package2"... "packageN", then to the router, it's like 20 computers. The second computer does its own conventional ISO download, and the round robin service is now 1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-2- . The user on the second computer is going "WTF?". Computer 2 is starved. Maybe you can't watch Netflix, or even open a web page on Computer 2, without timeouts. The router is doing its best to share resources, based on giving every *connection* a portion of the WAN bandwidth. Reducing the number of BITS jobs, might reduce this. If you set the BITS to doing four jobs, and machine 1 opened 4 connections (opening a new package download on a connection when the previous package is finished), it looks like this. Machine1 Machine2 BITS Downloads CaddyShack ISO 1 2 3 4 Package1 Package2 Package3 Package4 shack.iso Package5 Package6 Package7 Package8 ...still shack.iso Package9 PackageA PackageB PackageC ...still shack.iso The router sees five connections. If all connections railed (which seems to happen for Microsoft server downloads), then the router round robins and Machine 2 gets 20% of the bandwidth. Getting 20% of the bandwidth is sufficient to load browser pages without timeouts. Or slowly finish the shack.iso download (eventually). 1-1-1-1-2-1-1-1-1-2-... My theory is, that controlling the number of BITS jobs, *should* make the behavior at the router a bit more fair. The time to download the MediaCreationTool content doesn't change - because when MediaCreationTool opened 20 connections, they were only getting a few hundred K a piece anyway. There's a good chance that if the MediaCreationTool was limited to doing just one job at a time on the packaged download, it would still do a good job of maximizing the percentage of the WAN pipe it can get. I *have* caught a Microsoft server throttling. When I tried to download an SDK DVD from Microsoft once, it was downloading at something like 60KB/sec. And tests showed a consistency from one connection attempt to the next. The browser showed the download would take a whole 24 hours. Well, I located a parallel downloader, one which opens 8 parallel connections, maybe does a 1GB portion with each connection, and the eight pieces are pasted together at the end. And that cut my download time to 3 hours from 24 hours. That would be going in the opposite direction, introducing the possibility of unfairness by opening eight connections. But the thing is, each connection isn't running max_rate, so the sharing pattern is actually much better than expected. 1 1 1 1 It could have been unfair, 2-2-2-2 2-2-2-2 2-2-2-2 but the "1" connections are only 60K rate each and can't fill their pipe. Machine 2 gets plenty of slots. MediaCreationTool is doing the same sort of thing, only it's a side effect of downloading Packages, one Package per BITS job. Limiting the number of parallel BITS jobs that can be forked at one time, helps "tame" the unfair round-robin "disadvantage" at the router. I can test this (adjusting BITS), but it'll take a while. Paul |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
Tim wrote:
Do any of you know if Microsoft runs a bittorrent server? No, they have their own peer-to-peer equivalent ... http://andyburns.uk/misc/win10-delivery-optimisation.png |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
On 14/12/2018 04:25, Tim wrote:
Andy Burns wrote in news:g7fpk8F1bf6U1 @mid.individual.net: Tim wrote: I was downloading the Win10 1809 ISO, and I basically could not access anything else on the net until that download finished. what bufferbloat rating do you get from here? http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest I didn't notice. The next time I run speedtest I will check. Any reason why you didn't check right away, Tim? I did. It only takes a couple of minutes! -- Regards, David B. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
Paul wrote in news
Thank you Paul. The is probably the most cogent description of what appears to have been happening I could want. Question: When Microsoft is downloading an upgrade file on its own in the background, is the same BITS situation occurring? I seem to remember that although I could see the activity on my net meter, response time didn't seem to be as affected as when I did the ISO file in question. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
Tim wrote:
Paul wrote in news Thank you Paul. The is probably the most cogent description of what appears to have been happening I could want. Question: When Microsoft is downloading an upgrade file on its own in the background, is the same BITS situation occurring? I seem to remember that although I could see the activity on my net meter, response time didn't seem to be as affected as when I did the ISO file in question. Well, I found a way to watch BITS. It turns out, it will take me some effort to do the experiment of what happens. I had to install 1803, and prepare it for rollback in case multiple runs are required. But if you want to watch what is going on, open a command prompt and try: bitsadmin /monitor /allusers and the Command Prompt window will be turned into a monitor window. The more lines of text that appear in the window, the more BITS jobs started up. This is what it looks like at startup of bitsadmin. https://i.postimg.cc/tT9CcskV/bitsadmin.gif Extra lines of text, along with their "download progress", appear below that line of text. When that picture was taken, no BITS downloads were in progress. Bitsadmin as a command is deprecated, and the replacement applets are not a complete replacement. Thank goodness they didn't remove the previous program, just for the above usage. ******* For my first test, I ran MediaCreationTool and asked it to make me an ISO for installing on another machine. And only *one* BITS job opened. My experiment failed like a damp squib, as one connection is not going to squeeze out any other machines. Consequently, I need to trick the OS into upgrading 1803 to 1809 and putting on a demo of the latest BITS policy. I'll get back to that later on. Paul |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
Paul wrote:
Tim wrote: Paul wrote in news Thank you Paul. The is probably the most cogent description of what appears to have been happening I could want. Question: When Microsoft is downloading an upgrade file on its own in the background, is the same BITS situation occurring? I seem to remember that although I could see the activity on my net meter, response time didn't seem to be as affected as when I did the ISO file in question. The plot thickens. I caught the machine using Delivery Optimization, the downloading of packages from peer Windows 10 machines rather than from Microsoft. It downloaded about 700MB before I turned it off. It's a svchost containing "dosvc". The activity does not show in bitsadmin. I was having trouble in TCPView, seeing the download activity. Precious little of the 700MB was visible there. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/win...y-optimization Notice the monitoring capability is willing to show the number of connections, but the controls only work in terms of "bandwidth". There's a disconnect between how the monitoring works, and how the control works. I think I might have been receiving 1809 to upgrade my 1803 installation, via Windows Update. But because everything is labeled with long strings of numbers, the folder with the materials is "Access Denied", it's going to be pretty hard to say more. When I turned off Delivery Optimization in the Settings, the dosvc promptly deleted the entire "access denied" cache, so I could not go in and look at it. Maybe you can see a theme here... This is not turning out the way I expected - at all. So now I don't have a solution. Paul |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
Paul wrote in news
Maybe you can see a theme here... This is not turning out the way I expected - at all. So now I don't have a solution. Paul Thanks Paul. I appreciate your efforts. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
A way to throttle network data?
Tim wrote:
Paul wrote in news Maybe you can see a theme here... This is not turning out the way I expected - at all. So now I don't have a solution. Paul Thanks Paul. I appreciate your efforts. The results so far: 1) MediaCreationTool Opens one connection to download an ISO file. 2) WindowsUpgradexxxx tool Opens one connection to download an ESD file (encrypted version of a WIM). 3) Windows Update OS Upgrade May have started to use Delivery Optimization service host or "SVCHOST DoSRV". Opened many connections until I turned it off. Once Delivery Optimization was turned off in the Settings, the attempt to upgrade my machine just stopped, and the DoSRV cache was deleted (750MB worth). And now Windows Update won't offer 1809 to me, so my experiment is halted. DoSRV doesn't have connection level control, while BITS has max_job settings in GPEDIT. But now I can't test that the settings work, because Microsoft won't play along. https://i.postimg.cc/PqJQxPfs/dosrc-...ck-to-BITS.gif https://i.postimg.cc/x1MSZ1VQ/docmd-now-off.gif https://i.postimg.cc/7L5tRB22/bits-j...r-computer.gif https://i.postimg.cc/6qPyMpJR/bits-jobs-per-user.gif Paul |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|