Thankyou so much for responding Brian.. I think I'll go email this post
to him.. :P
Kevin
On Wed, 1 Nov 1995, Brian 'MegaZone' Bikowicz wrote:
> Once upon a time Kevin M Lynn shaped the electrons to say...
> > He told me that PM2e's have a rather slow processor in them and
> >that when going with a fully stocked PM2e you cannot have all 30 ports
> >set to 115200 or you'll overrun the processor and some people will start
> >getting loss of carrier because of this..
>
> WRONG WRONG WRONG
>
> He doesn't know what he is talking about. Besides, we don't control carrier
> in the first place, the modem does that. No way is load related to our
> cutting someone off or not answering, the main processor doesn't deal with
> that anyway, the serial controller chips do.
>
> In fact, we have 1 386 processor on a PM-2e-30. Another well known TS maker
> users 2 386 chips on a 32 port model.
>
> We have higher throughput.
>
> There is much more to it than chip speed or the number of processors. Our
> hardware and software is just more efficient then they are.
>
> An answer I just gave on comp.dcom.servers:
>
> We can handle all ports set at 115200 with no loss via buffering. Depending
> on overhead we can pass 100,000-150,000 bytes at a sustained rate from the
> ether to the serial ports. (PPP takes more overhead that SLIP for example.)
> 1-1.5 Megabits, not 6.9 Megabits. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
>
>
> In other words, we can handle roughly a T1 of throughput on a PM. And even
> at full load you don't loose any data, nor will it effect connections. If
> load gets that heavy, we buffer and use flow control to regulate it.
>
> -MZ
> --
> Livingston Enterprises Technical Support
> Phone: 800-458-9966 FAX: 510-426-8951
> support@livingston.com <http://www.livingston.com/>
> 6920 Koll Center Parkway #220, Pleasanton, CA 94566
>
>