[This message was posted by Dimitry London of Morgan Stanley <dimitry.lon...@morganstanley.com> to the "FAST Protocol" discussion forum at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/46. You can reply to it on-line at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/764ecc22 - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]
> The main savings that you're likely to see with smaller packets over > Ethernet will be because of packet batching. If you can send more data > in the same number of packets i.e. the same number of kernel calls, then > you'll get CPU reduction. > > However, more messages per packet means higher latency for the first > oldest messages, so it's always a trade off. I plan to get reductions by utilizing across-message data compression. That is, using deltas I will send 1 byte instead of 20, for example. Thus, initial reduction will not introduce any additional latency and will use the same number of system calls as before. So the question is how much CPU if any sending 50-byte messages vs 1000-byte message at 15K messages/per second saves? Thanks, Dimitry [You can unsubscribe from this discussion group by sending a message to mailto:unsubscribe+100932...@fixprotocol.org] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Financial Information eXchange" group. To post to this group, send email to FIX-Protocol@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to fix-protocol+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/FIX-Protocol?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
