[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[TIGGE #XLU-757491]: tigge ldm server specs

Hi Baudouin,

I apologize for not answering this on Friday.  I was on my way out of
the door when I saw your message arrive.

> what would be the impact (locks, i/o...) of sending fewer larger
> products (i.e. 1000 files of 100MB)? One obvious drawback we need to
> resend larger amount of data. But apart from that?

There would be three impacts:

- a decrease in the number of write locks per unit of time (good)

- the need to have larger portions of the LDM queue "expired" (scoured)
  to make room for new products (this could be bad)

- as you say, the need to resend a larger block of data when it is missed
  (this would be bad)

Since the initial data transfer tests between ECMWF and NCAR/Unidata were
very successful when using larger products (10, 20, 30, 60 MB), I would have
no doubt that the effect on the ECMWF-NCAR transfers would work fine.
It would probably be a very good idea to perform transfer tests to/from CMA
to see what the potential impacts would be there.


Unidata User Support                                    UCAR Unidata Program
(303) 497-8642                                                 P.O. Box 3000
address@hidden                                   Boulder, CO 80307
Unidata HomePage                       http://www.unidata.ucar.edu

Ticket Details
Ticket ID: XLU-757491
Department: Support IDD TIGGE
Priority: Normal
Status: Closed

NOTE: All email exchanges with Unidata User Support are recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and then made publicly available through the web. If you do not want to have your interactions made available in this way, you must let us know in each email you send to us.