In my tests I have seen as much as a 30% drop in Windows file sharing performance with 2 ms of latency vs <1ms. This was in a large radiology application. Applications like FTP work without any issues. Some applications are more sensitive(SMB). Low latency to me is measure in microseconds not milliseconds(mostly layer 2).
-----Original Message----- From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Cadwallader Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:31 AM To: Doug Hanks Cc: Juniper-Nsp List Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric I deal with a lot of those issues also and usually when I ask what do they mean by low latency the response comes back with sub-25ms. My data center is all 1-2ms max on an aging platform. The other question I have is what happens to that entire logical device when it fails in spectacular ways. I also agree that a sub-ms approach is needed in certain areas, however a tiered approach has its advantages also. We are looking and evaluating replacing our aging platform in the data center and will be following this closely. Jeff Cadwallader On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Doug Hanks <dha...@juniper.net> wrote: > A lot of our customers require low latency: financial, higher education, > HPC environments and utility. > > Juniper has taken the time to solve more than just the low latency problem. > We're trying to solve larger problems such as how do you manage an entire > campus or data center as one logical device; that's able to scale; and > delivers performance and low latency. > > Doug > > _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
