[mmaimcal] forwarded message on subarrays from Jacob Baars

[Bryan Butler]

> 
> Steven T. Myers writes:
>  > 
>  > I still see little benefit from distinguishing between the number that
>  > the correlator can handle (6 proposed) and the software (8 proposed),
>  > and as per my previous reply to Stephane's first mail on the subject I
>  > prefer to set the latter two to 8 (my 4 "hard" versus 8 "soft" 
>  > subarrays).  This will simplify things and will be one less complicated
>  > distinction that the user needs to be aware of.  Unless there is a
>  > compelling case that the correlator needs to have 6 instead of 8, I
>  > strongly urge us to keep things as simple as possible.  (The cost of
>  > another 4 first LOs is an example of a good reason to distinguish between
>  > 4 and 8 there, but 4 isnt enough for everything...).
> In fact, the correlator handles 16 now.  I think the software should be
> able to handle what the correlator can handle, at least.
> 
> Al
> 

i agree with harvey.  i see no reason for the software to limit the number
of subarrays unless there is a compelling reason to.  i had a discussion
with steve blachman about this, and in the VLA online-system upgrade, the
idea is not to have any software limit.

	-bryan