[evla-sw-discuss] Delay models to station boards

[Allen Farris]

I think it is a good idea to put a sequence number in the document.

I've been looking at an altogether different issue: what is the rate of 
monitor data from a full array and can the process that captures the 
monitor data and stores it in the archive keep up with the transaction rate?

Right now, the only way to tell if monitor packets have been lost is to 
retrieve the monitor data from the archive and see if that are any gaps 
in the timing.  A simple sequence number in the monitor packets would 
enable you to detect dropped packets in real time.

Allen


Barry Clark wrote:
> Kevin has a valid point that we don't know whether datagrams will work
> adequately without a test.  However, I don't see how to arrange a 
> realistic test without having the whole correlator room networking in
> place.  (Although actually, I am more concerned that datagrams might 
> get lost within the mchost stack than I am about the network.)  What 
> should we do to test deliveries?   (At a minimum, we should put a sequence
> number in the document.)
> 
> It's not totally clear that connected sockets help - having a document
> delivered late is in some ways worse than not at all.
> _______________________________________________
> evla-sw-discuss mailing list
> evla-sw-discuss at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evla-sw-discuss