|
Back
Midas
Rome
Roody
Rootana
|
Midas DAQ System |
Not logged in |
|
|
20 Jun 2012, Konstantin Olchanski, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
20 Jun 2012, Konstantin Olchanski, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
24 Jun 2012, Konstantin Olchanski, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
25 Jun 2012, Stefan Ritt, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
25 Jun 2012, Konstantin Olchanski, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
26 Jun 2012, Konstantin Olchanski, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
26 Jun 2012, Konstantin Olchanski, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
21 Jun 2012, Stefan Ritt, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
21 Jun 2012, Konstantin Olchanski, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
22 Jun 2012, Stefan Ritt, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
24 Jun 2012, Konstantin Olchanski, Info, midas vme benchmarks
|
|
Message ID: 806
Entry time: 20 Jun 2012
In reply to: 805
Reply to this: 813
|
Author: |
Konstantin Olchanski |
Topic: |
Info |
Subject: |
midas vme benchmarks |
|
|
> I am recording here the results from a test VME system using two VF48 waveform digitizers
Note 1: data compression is about 89% (hence "data to disk" rate is much smaller than the "data from VME" rate)
Note 2: switch from VME MBLT64 block transfer to 2eVME block transfer:
- raises the VME data rate from 40 to 48 M/s
- event rate from 220/sec to 260/sec
- mlogger CPU use from 64% to about 80%
This is consistent with the measured VME block transfer rates for the VF48 module: MBLT64 is about 40 M/s, 2eVME is about 50 M/s (could be
80 M/s if no clock cycles were lost to sync VME signals with the VF48 clocks), 2eSST is implemented but impossible - VF48 cannot drive the
VME BERR and RETRY signals. Evil standards, grumble, grumble, grumble).
K.O. |