This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.
=============================================================================== Robb Kambic Unidata Program Center Software Engineer III Univ. Corp for Atmospheric Research address@hidden WWW: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/ =============================================================================== ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 10:58:38 -0500 (EST) From: Tom McDermott <address@hidden> To: Jim Koermer <address@hidden> Subject: Re: Topology Questions Jim, I'm probably not very qualified to answer your questions, but I'll give it a try based on my own understanding. I'm sure more knowledgeable people can offer corrections. On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Jim Koermer wrote: > It seems that lately everytime that I check the Unidata topology pages, > usually after I am seeing data problems, I seem to see the same thing-- > ~+60 minute latencies on FOS, but only a few minutes on McIDAS. Why is > there such a large difference in latencies, since I'm getting data from > the same upstream site (UIUC or UMICH - it doesn't seem to matter which > one)? You may be getting it from the same upstream site, but the top level sites are getting it from different sources. The top level site for MCIDAS is at SSEC, whereas the toplevel site for WMO, motherlode, is at Unidata, which in turn is fed by 3 ingesting hosts at unidata, weather underground and SSEC. Now the amount of data on the WMO feed is much greater than the MCIDAS feed, and this can result in greater latencies, especially when the gridded data is coming in (this is especially true on the days they transmit the models twice). The FOS is really NOAAPORT now, whereas I believe MCIDAS is not part of NOAAPORT, so this could account for some of the discrepancy. One thing you don't mention is whether your upstream site is also showing +60 minute latencies on FOS. If not, the problem may be in the quality of your network connection to your upstream host. I suppose you could ask Unidata for alternative upstream hosts if the problem persists. This may or may not help, depending on whether your network bandwidth is maxed out our not. > It also seems that a number of downstream sites are in the ~+60 minute > on FOS, but much lower on McIDAS. I've noticed this many times > recently. At 2250Z, I still haven't received any hourly ob data for > 22Z, yet I'm sure that if I check back in an hour, I'll see most of the > obs eventually came in. Why should the obs that come in small batches > be so delayed, yet the much larger McIDAS areafiles are coming in fine? > Generally most sites request the text data on IDS|DDPLUS over the same connection as the HDS feed, so if there is a slowdown with HDS, IDS|DDPLUS will be affected as well. Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tom McDermott Email: address@hidden System Administrator Phone: (716) 395-5718 Earth Sciences Dept. Fax: (716) 395-2416 SUNY College at Brockport > Something just doesn't seem right. > > Jim > -- > James P. Koermer E-Mail: address@hidden > Professor of Meteorology Office Phone: (603)535-2574 > Natural Science Department Office Fax: (603)535-2723 > Plymouth State College WWW: http://vortex.plymouth.edu/ > Plymouth, NH 03264 >