North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: [ppml] too many variables

  • From: Eliot Lear
  • Date: Mon Aug 13 08:30:43 2007
  • Authentication-results: ams-dkim-1; header.From=lear@cisco.com; dkim=pass (s ig from cisco.com/amsdkim1002 verified; );
  • Dkim-signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=595; t=1187008166; x=1187872166; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim1002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=lear@cisco.com; z=From:=20Eliot=20Lear=20<lear@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[ppml]=20too=20many=20variables |Sender:=20; bh=NOLYO+JHrTvjVai9klHrsYKf/mAAGZE2l9pYRn3Zbu4=; b=QngWXiMzwi6mB56MO9ngElJJ/f107lLm5YXIX5F/GVkN24bY94SbXpLCgoT0U7ancoJ/9G08 9ZxoT5Ux5v57iu2T1rsEqXdi+VT2qYU2D1FFX1+mbUoR141sXPrvbz1D;

Leo Bicknell wrote:
To Bill's original e-mail. Can we count on 2x every 18 months going
forward? No. But betting on 2x every 24 months, and accounting for the
delta between currently shipping and currently available hardware seems
completely reasonable when assessing the real problem.

This assumes "the real problem" is CPU performance, where many have argued that the real problem is memory bandwidth. Memory doesn't track Moore's Law. Besides, Moore's Law isn't a law. What's your Plan B? This is where a lot of RRG/RAM work is going on right now.

Eliot