Article View: comp.protocols.appletalk
Article #5837Re: Ethernet vs LocalTalk
From: Milo S. Medin
Date: Mon, 08 May 1989 23:45
Date: Mon, 08 May 1989 23:45
15 lines
1211 bytes
1211 bytes
Well, I can certainly blast out bits through a hyperchannel a lot faster than pumping useful data through it. Many pieces of hardware deal with more small packets much worse than few large packets. Things like setting up DMA, dealing with interrupts, or polling interfaces and such. In general, there are 2 costs involved in protocol processing. One is fixed per message unit size, and the other is variable with the size. Hardware issues can affect both. I'll give hyperchannel as a straightforward example. Thanks, Milo PS A standard performance of 2.2 Mbits/sec throughput isn't that bad, but it's far from 9 Mbits/sec, which is the point I was trying to make.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<25142@ames.arc.nasa.gov>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!ames!cincsac.arc.nasa.gov!medinReferences:
<981@draken.nada.kth.se> <947@draken.nada.kth.se> <29980@apple.Apple.COM> <278@suna.CMI.COM> <24837@ames.arc.nasa.gov> <25079@ames.arc.nasa.gov>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!ames!cincsac.arc.nasa.gov!medin From: medin@cincsac.arc.nasa.gov (Milo S. Medin) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk Subject: Re: Ethernet vs LocalTalk Message-ID: <25142@ames.arc.nasa.gov> Date: 8 May 89 23:45:31 GMT References: <981@draken.nada.kth.se> <947@draken.nada.kth.se> <29980@apple.Apple.COM> <278@suna.CMI.COM> <24837@ames.arc.nasa.gov> <25079@ames.arc.nasa.gov> Sender: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov Lines: 15