Re: [Mratc-developers] Define some ATC specifications

[<aqu...@ya...>]

 --- Michael Ross <ht...@us...> wrote: 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aquila Deus" <aqu...@ya...>
> 
> > If we plan around handling US air traffic volume, we should be
> > able to handle volumes for any part of the world.  For the US,
> I
> > think a good maximum for the number of flights in the air at
> one
> > time is about 223,440.
> 
> How about multiply the number by 10 or 100?
> 
> Why multiply by 10 or 100?  We can build a scalable system, but
> initially, we just need to handle what's there.

But we're building an ATC for the future. So it should be able to handle the
flights in next 20 or 30 years, right?

> 
> > I have one good news and one bad news:
> >
> > The good news is I found a JVM optimized for extremely
> large-scale
> > applications: BEA's JRockit. And it supports lightweight
> threads (called "thin
> > threads").
> >
> > The bad news is the lastest version of JRockit seems to have
> removed the
> > lightweight threads :D
> >
> > I don't think it's good to use native threads or processes to
> emulate millions
> > of flights. Maybe we should really consider erlang seriously
> (but then we will
> > have to use emacs). Do you have a better solution?
> 
> I was thinking of approaching it with Perl and MySQL; you are
> invited to put together your best approach at the problem
> (unless you want to come along with me and Perl); and we will
> compare the two.  I think the scale involved here would benefit
> from a database, with its indexing capabilities.  If we both
> develop separate systems, we need to conform to some basic
> definitions (like having the same lookahead interval size and
> number and separating general flight direction by altitude),
> though, so we can compare apples to apples.
> 
> Threads can be done in Perl, if you are interested.  Yes,
> 223,440 threads sound like a lot.  I've been thinking iteration
> all along, rather than threads, so that number of flights does
> not discourage me.  However, we might get an ATC system put
> together that takes an hour to iterate through 223,440 flights.
> If that is the case, we can divide and conquer.

OK

=====
me = d2004xx = d2003xx = d2002xx


	
	
		
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!  http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com