[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Re: Data latencies: could much of this be avoided? (fwd)
- Subject: Re: Data latencies: could much of this be avoided? (fwd)
- Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:02:53 -0700 (MST)
===============================================================================
Robb Kambic Unidata Program Center
Software Engineer III Univ. Corp for Atmospheric Research
address@hidden WWW: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/
===============================================================================
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 20:12:01 -0600 (CST)
From: Gilbert Sebenste <address@hidden>
To: Peter Schmid <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: Data latencies: could much of this be avoided?
On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Peter Schmid wrote:
> The reason for this is that if you seperate out the feeds into two requests
> with one of the being the hostname and the other being an IP then the ldm
> issues two seperate pqact's for the two processes. So any backup in one feed
> does not effect the other feed.
Yes, yes, yes! I have yet to have ONE latency beyond, say, 10 seconds for
IDS|DDPLUS and one minute for HRS since I have switched. That I can live
with!
*******************************************************************************
Gilbert Sebenste ********
Internet: address@hidden (My opinions only!) ******
Staff Meteorologist, Northern Illinois University ****
E-mail: address@hidden ***
web: http://weather.admin.niu.edu **
Work phone: 815-753-5492 *
*******************************************************************************
