Talk:Latency (engineering)

message: This article seems on a first glance to be completely misunderstanding the nature of latency, confusing latency with the general notion of throughput.
Latency is not just "a measure of amount of time between the start of an action and its completion", it is specifically the amount of time that is unavoidably expended before transmission actually begins.  To go along with the travel analogy, the jet plane may travel faster than a car once when both are in motion, and the jet plane may carry more.  However, loading up luggage and passengers and starting up the vehicle will inevitably take longer for the jet plane than for the car; the amount of time it takes to prepare for the travel is the latency.  -- Antaeus Feldspar 21:47, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: "No matter how small the amount of data, for any particular network device there's always a minimum time that you can never beat. That's called the latency of the device."
Maybe this usage was chosen because the author wanted to compare networking methods in general, rather than their performance on a specific task. Does anyone have authoritative examples of contrasting usage? -- Avenue 23:22, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite?

message: I have marked "comparison of latency and throughput" to be merged with this. Gigs 10:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would add Lag as well in this merger.--itpastorn (talk) 21:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Unless there is a compelling reason, I oppose this merger. Kushal (talk) 02:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Comparison of latency and throughput now redirects to Network performance. ~Kvng (talk) 14:42, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge proposed 

message: The article says that light takes 4.8 microseconds for every kilometre.  This is wrong, it should be 3.3 microseconds.  I don't know if the rest of the paragraph is correct or not though.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.78.239.138 (talk) 14:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The source of error is probably due to the wrong refraction index assumed for fibre. The speed of light in fibre is about 200,000 km/s (see for example Optical fiber), so the number is more or less correct.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.182.50.46 (talk) 12:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably so. In any case, this figure is no longer in the article. ~Kvng (talk) 14:42, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  error in the maths 

message: I just read the first sentence - it appeared when I googled 'latency'.
"Latency is a time interval between the stimulation and response, or, from a more general point of view, as a time delay between the cause and the effect of some physical change in the system being observed.[1]"
1. Did no-one notice that it's not even a coherent sentence?
2. The reference is ridiculous, barely relevant to the sentence. At least, it's nothing like support for the definition given. It has a few very brief and specialized hi-tech uses of the term.
So. Judging by this sentence, the rest of the article is.. well, I didn't bother. 110.20.158.134 (talk) 01:21, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  First sentence not good. 

message: I'm proposing to merge content from Low latency into this article. All the content in Low latency is about latency and efforts and reasons to minimize it in context already described here. The paragraph on high-speed trading would make a helpful addition to this article. ~Kvng (talk) 15:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from [[Low latency]]