From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri May 14 8:22:16 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from obie.softweyr.com (unknown [204.68.178.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55FDA15625 for ; Fri, 14 May 1999 08:22:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.com (homer.softweyr.com [204.68.178.39]) by obie.softweyr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA02518; Fri, 14 May 1999 09:20:57 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Message-ID: <373C3F58.13ABC952@softweyr.com> Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 09:20:56 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 3.1-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Adrian Filipi-Martin , Harold Gutch , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: time for another upgrade? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > Adrian Filipi-Martin writes: > > I was under the impression that the new machine was on gigabit > > ethernet. As you correctly point out it is impossible to do 1TB on 100Mbps > > ethernet. In fact you cannot even do the 969GB/day cited in the upgrade > > press release. 969*2^30*10/86400 == 120,423,128bps. This agrees with what > > the stats pages are reporting today. > > Why are you counting 10 bits per byte? Ethernet doesn't have start/stop bits. > > OTOH, I wonder if the Ethernet preamble and trailer have to be > subtracted from the 100 Mbps figure... Yes, it does. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC http://www.softweyr.com/~softweyr wes@softweyr.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message