> > If you have all the same port speed, small buffers are fine. If you have > 100G and 1G ports, you'll need big buffers wherever the transition to the > smaller port speed is located.
While the larger buffer there you are likely to be severely impacting application throughput. On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 9:05 AM Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: > What I've observed is that it's better to have a big buffer device when > you're mixing port speeds. The more dramatic the port speed differences > (and the more of them), the more buffer you need. > > If you have all the same port speed, small buffers are fine. If you have > 100G and 1G ports, you'll need big buffers wherever the transition to the > smaller port speed is located. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Dmitry Sherman" <dmi...@interhost.net> > *To: *nanog@nanog.org > *Sent: *Friday, April 9, 2021 7:57:05 AM > *Subject: *Trident3 vs Jericho2 > > Once again, which is better shared buffer featurerich or fat buffer > switches? > When its better to put big buffer switch? When its better to drop and > retransmit instead of queueing? > > Thanks. > Dmitry > >