[Fwd: Re: 32-port gigabit switch]
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Eray Ozkural exa at ttnet.net.trThu Mar 6 20:52:26 PST 2003
- Previous message: [Fwd: Re: 32-port gigabit switch]
- Next message: [Fwd: Re: 32-port gigabit switch]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Friday 07 March 2003 01:18, Justin Moore wrote: > > Additionally the latency on Gigabit is simply to high for large > > clusters. Remember on clusters latency is more important than > > throughput. > > Be careful ... I think I hear Rob Brown furiously typing up an "it > depends" response (and I'm a few buildings away). You shouldn't say > these kinds of things on the beowulf list unless your mail server is > ready to be "rgb-dot'ed". :) > It depends on the application :) Actually throughput is more important than latency in many cases I believe. And of course while it is not too difficult using common programming techniques to optimize for high throughput high latency it would be much harder to do so with low throughput low latency don't you think? :) Thanks, -- Eray Ozkural (exa) <erayo at cs.bilkent.edu.tr> Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara www: http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~erayo Malfunction: http://mp3.com/ariza GPG public key fingerprint: 360C 852F 88B0 A745 F31B EA0F 7C07 AE16 874D 539C
- Previous message: [Fwd: Re: 32-port gigabit switch]
- Next message: [Fwd: Re: 32-port gigabit switch]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
