FQ_Codel vs FQ_Pie

[Siarap]

Its not HOW TO but its informational topic. I get much better results with my hybrid fiber-coaxial (docsis 3.0) modem when im using flow queue pie than flow queue codel. With fq codel i need to waste 20% of my bandtwith for good bufferbloat results. With fq pie i waste 3% for sqm, and have better results than with fq codel. Anyone can tell me what results achieve with fq pie? Im using "Enable PIE"(linux man pages says thas fq pie uses pie by default but i have different results with that option enabled), and "CoDel ECN" on download only (ecn setting works for fq pie when fq pie is used). Increased FQ-CoDel flows to 4096 (it works as fq pie flows when fq pie is used) but i must WARN you. Increasing flows requires reboot (flows are alocated in ram during bot time) but if you increase them to much you can brick your router because it consumes some ram. Im using 4096 now for 8 gig of ram on router. Tune your target and interval as is described here : https://docs.opnsense.org/manual/how-tos/shaper_bufferbloat.html Pie uses many codel parameters but has different defaults. But i dont know do its implemented in opnsense to control this parameters for fq pie. Just tuned it as codel and have much better results than with fq codel. Fq pie is implemented as default queue mechanism in docsis 3.1 standard. Docsis 3.1 is described as low latency docsis.

You can try it and share your results.

EDIT: I must say that my results may be different each time i test bufferbloat. I have low quality isp with no guaranteed speed. My max bandwith fluctuates. On weekends i have always worse results than during week.