From f85a1d9a5be9c8be681af28a5981dc67006c7a88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Arceliar Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 16:09:10 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Update 2021-06-26-v0-4-prerelease-benchmarks.md --- _posts/2021-06-26-v0-4-prerelease-benchmarks.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/_posts/2021-06-26-v0-4-prerelease-benchmarks.md b/_posts/2021-06-26-v0-4-prerelease-benchmarks.md index ad43148..962e1ee 100644 --- a/_posts/2021-06-26-v0-4-prerelease-benchmarks.md +++ b/_posts/2021-06-26-v0-4-prerelease-benchmarks.md @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ The `mobility2` test is essentially a much more aggressive variation of the abov ![mobility2_arrival_progress](/assets/images/2021-06-26/mobility2_arrival_progress.svg) ![mobility2_traffic_progress](/assets/images/2021-06-26/mobility2_traffic_progress.svg) -The main feature to note is that, aside from having terrible reliability in this test, `v0.3.16` uses a ridiculous amount of bandwidth when mobility is involved. With `v0.4rc3`, the bandwith use drops to at or below around 10KBps, depending on how mobile things are. I'm fairly certain that most of this bandwith is still a reaction to mobility events in the network, because (as we're about to see) the bandwith use a pretty low in static networks. +The main feature to note is that, aside from having terrible reliability in this test, `v0.3.16` uses a ridiculous amount of bandwidth when mobility is involved. With `v0.4rc3`, the bandwith use drops to at or below around 10KBps, depending on how mobile things are. I'm fairly certain that most of this bandwith is still a reaction to mobility events in the network, because (as we're about to see) the bandwith use is pretty low in static networks. #### Scalability1