4 ms·

TBQH, the "acceptable latency" is whatever is defined in your contract with them. If the response to that is "there isn't one", well, there's your real problem

• jamesmishra 6y ago
  I don't think every performance metric has to be tied to an explicit contract. There are thousands of such metrics in a large organization's tech stack. What OP is asking is whether the performance they are seeing is comparable to the industry-leading load balancers that HN readers are familiar with. The answer to that question is independent of any contract.
• cflewis 6y ago
  I once asked an engineer I respect deeply “what’s an acceptable timeout for this integration test?” His answer has stuck with me for a long time: “whatever your users will tolerate when they attempt that workflow.” Software can always be made better and can always be made faster. But you do have to know when to stop, and for me it’s always at “what my users will tolerate.”
  • sgc 6y ago
    Don't push them to the edge every time. Try to have a conformable margin so they can use your services without it grating on them.
• contravariant 6y ago
  The reason they're asking about acceptable latency is that unless the contract specifies differently both parties are bound by what the counterparty can reasonably expect. Each country has contract law like this, with lots of legal precedents on what can and cannot reasonably be expected in certain situations. Part of the reason there are all these terms and conditions documents that nobody reads is to prevent this ambiguity (to a point). Although legally it's a bit weak because you cannot really expect people to have agreed to all terms (but it does reverse the burden of proof somewhat, so it's still useful).