Re: Data latencies: could much of this be avoided? (fwd)

===============================================================================
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                                                *
*******************************************************************************