Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- From: Steve Wampler <swampler@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 09:38:54 -0700
Rick Jones wrote:
... Of course, that does
not include getting the data out to some sort of storage :)
Well, yes - that's the *other* thing keeping me awake a night[*].
But that's really a question for a different group. (Of course,
if anyone here has suggestions [besides praying for *really fast*,
*really big* SSDs to become affordable in the next two years], I'd
be happy to hear them - email would be fine, since it's off-topic.)
[*]It doesn't just have to get to disk that fast, but has to
be read off of disk [at ~1/3 the write rate, using the math
interpretation of '~' this time!] at the same time.
--
Steve Wampler -- swampler@xxxxxxxx
The gods that smiled on your birth are now laughing out loud.
.
- References:
- load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- From: Steve Wampler
- Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- From: Rick Jones
- Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- From: Steve Wampler
- Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- From: david
- Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- From: Steve Wampler
- Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- From: Steve Wampler
- Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- From: Rick Jones
- load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- Prev by Date: Re: use alarm() to achieve timeout.
- Next by Date: Re: tcp KEEPALIVE will be sent in real time in heavy loaded system
- Previous by thread: Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- Next by thread: Re: load-balancing twin 10GbE?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|