Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 18:46 +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
>> How about a totally dynamic latency, which grows as soon as network
>> traffic per hour decreases and the other way round.
>
> I'm not sure. I just know we have to build the framework so that other
> much clever peop
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 18:46 +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> How about a totally dynamic latency, which grows as soon as network
> traffic per hour decreases and the other way round.
I'm not sure. I just know we have to build the framework so that other
much clever people than me can build policy that
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 18:41 +0100, Phil Knirsch wrote:
> Yep, absolutely agree. But even there wouldn't it be nice if e.g. during
> the day that server would have a 10us latency for CPU and during the
> night automatically transition to higher and higher latencies, up to
> even 100ms or so? Or a
