Subject:
|
Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Jul 2006 20:30:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5709 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, July 6, 2006 11:45 am, Dave Hurley wrote:
> The idea of throughput zones was
> mine, but if too many people find it offensive or it proves to be too
> complicated, then its no biggie.
I don't think it's a question of being offensive. It's simply a question of how it
would work. The "Leaky Bucket" analogy only works if all modules can handle the
same average throughput over an extended period of time. Otherwise, the "bucket"
will simply fill up and overflow.
By design, all the balls go in one end of the GBC, and come out the other. For the
"throughput zones" to work, there must be a way to get some balls from the middle of
the GBC, around the slower modules, and to the end.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: thoughts on gbc module reliability
|
| (...) FWIW I do have a bypass on my module. I just have it blocked right now while I am testing the remainder of it. My earlier post was an acknowledgement of the difficulties that exist in meeting the minimum rate. I certainly am not trying to make (...) (18 years ago, 6-Jul-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
43 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
