Small updates.

[loba-papers.git] / loba-besteffort / loba-besteffort.tex

diff --git a/loba-besteffort/loba-besteffort.tex b/loba-besteffort/loba-besteffort.tex
index 2d0f414fd365ec501a0ea2249e627a4454fde86f..d731afee8eebb95564aa7efb44918e2c725c35a0 100644 (file)
--- a/loba-besteffort/loba-besteffort.tex
+++ b/loba-besteffort/loba-besteffort.tex
@@ -732,9 +732,17 @@ Before looking at the different variations, we'll first show that the plain
 strategy.  On the graphs from the figure~\ref{fig.results1}, these strategies
 are respectively labeled ``b'' and ``a''.
 
 strategy.  On the graphs from the figure~\ref{fig.results1}, these strategies
 are respectively labeled ``b'' and ``a''.
 

-twice faster on lines
-almost equivalent on torus
-worse on hcubes
+We can see that the relative performance of these startegies is mainly
+influenced by the application topology.  It's for the line topology that the
+difference is the more important.  In this case, the \besteffort{} strategy is
+nearly twice as fast as the \makhoul{} strategy.
+
+On the contrary, for the hypercube topoly, the \besteffort{} strategy performs
+worse than the \makhoul{} strategy.
+
+Finally, the results are more nuanced for the torus topology.
+
+This can be explained by ...

 
 -> interconnection
 
 
 -> interconnection
 


@@ -763,6 +771,7 @@ Soit c'est équivalent, soit on gagne -> surtout quand les comms coutent cher et
 qu'il y a beaucoup de voisins.
 
 \subsubsection{The $k$ parameter}
 qu'il y a beaucoup de voisins.
 
 \subsubsection{The $k$ parameter}

+\label{results-k}

 
 Dans le cas où les comms coutent cher et ou BE se fait avoir, on peut ameliorer
 les perfs avec le param k.
 
 Dans le cas où les comms coutent cher et ou BE se fait avoir, on peut ameliorer
 les perfs avec le param k.