Talk:Relationship between latency and throughput

message: I added some info on the bandwidth-delay product.  This entire article could possibly be merged into the bandwidth-delay product article, since there's really very little useful information here. Gigs 10:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bandwidth-delay product 

message: I just rebuilt the article, and I believe that it should be moved to "Relationship between Latency and Throughput". See what you think. Since this rewrite was pretty much a brain dump, it will probably require cleanup.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by HatlessAtlas (talk • contribs) 19:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete article reconstruct, with additional citations.  

message: In my work I've tried improving throughput of servers sending data to a tape drive.  The drive will have a rated top speed of X MB/s but it needs a steady stream of data. (Drive-based data compression complicates this further so I will disregard it here)  Oversimplifying a little, tape drives have two speeds - "fast" and "stop". If the data provided is not sufficient the drive will stop, wait for a buffer to fill, then resume.  Each time this happens it imposes a time penalty.  If the server and it's related communication elements (bus speed, network speed, source data rate, etc) are just fast enough to provide sufficient data for this tape drive, then upgrading the drive can slow down overall throughput because the new drive may have a higher minimum speed that exceeds the server's capability.
It was difficult in our scenario to prove that the server (network card) was the bottleneck because the server/card does not use 100% of its capacity if the tape drive is taking time to stop and start so often.
A potential reference: http://storagemagazine.techtarget.com/ and search "How faster tape drives can slow down your backups"
I'd love to see an animation that might illustrate this or similar phenomena.
Can someone think of other examples of this relationship between throughput and latency?
The idea could use some more work.  Feel free to point me somewhere more appropriate if there is another label for this concept.
Walkingstick3 (talk) 02:09, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limited bandwidth causing latency 

message: What makes this article relevant to Wikipedia? Only one other wp article links to it. I believe it originally aimed at promoting two white papers by Stuart Cheshire: It's the Latency, Stupid and Latency and the Quest for Interactivity. There are a few other Wikipedia articles of the character "relationship between a and b" or "a vs b", but those are typically well-known debates, and have numerous references. Part of this article, for example the article lead, suffer from essay-style rather than encyclopedic style. 
Would it be possible to make the article more encyclopedic, if it was renamed e.g. perceived network speed (see related academic papers and books), or focused upon web response time (see "academic papers"  and books). Would it help if it relied upon more academic papers related to latency and network throughput? Or is it better to simply delete it? Mange01 (talk) 22:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Essay-like and hardly relevant article. Rename or delete?