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 Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated.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.
Gregory Grosshans wrote: > > Presently the SPC is using modified acqserver code, originally from FSL, > to inject 2-4 NOAAPORT channels into LDM 5.1.2. All products are being > inserted in the queue with the same feedtype (e.g. WMO). The NWSTG > products are modified to look like a FOS feed. The most recent version > of LDM allows numerous feed types for the various data sets flowing > through NOAAPORT. The SPC uses LDM to receive and move data around > in-house. We don't feed any data sets across our WAN, and if we do, the > downstream user would likely request a subset with the 'request' line. > Can you tell me is there any advantage to LDM performance if one actually > breaks up the NOAAPORT stream and assigns various feedtypes to different > product categories? > > Thanks, > Gregg Hi Gregg, I can think of only one significant way that multiple feed types might improve performance. I suspect there would be a performance improvement in matching patterns to product IDs, i.e., I assume that the LDM would first look at a product's feedtype and rule out products with non-matching feed types before attempting to match a pattern against the ID. Since pattern matching can be costly performance-wise, eliminating a significant number of products from that test might make a difference. Anne -- *************************************************** Anne Wilson UCAR Unidata Program address@hidden P.O. Box 3000 Boulder, CO 80307 ---------------------------------------------------- Unidata WWW server http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/ ****************************************************