At 06:42 PM 11/30/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Subject: Re: Re: Zipf vs. Uniform
>
>For some reason, I have a feeling that
>Cisco's cache can handle Zipf model
>well, but not so well if the Unifom
>model is used...
>
>I tought Cisco can use the strength of the
>Wisconsin's design to handle the Unifom
>model well.
>
>Amy
What a pathetic misunderstanding of the issue at hand, and what a cheap attempt
at point-scoring, completely out of context of this mailing list, and to top if off, the
cowardice to not reveal yourself.
Choice:
1) Every hit comes from disk: Latency is purely disk bound, disks more loaded,
need more disks, caching solution costs more.
2) A fair portion of hits comes from RAM: Latency is disk/memory portion thereof,
disks less loaded, disk latency improves too, need less disks, things cost less.
Which scenario would you prefer to have?
Stew.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 12:00:09 MDT