3 ms·
Considering that the data rate of the configuration specified at the scope is ~14Tbps, not really. Even the data rate that the scope is interpolating from is ~7
by ignaloidas 4y ago
Considering that the data rate of the configuration specified at the scope is ~14Tbps, not really. Even the data rate that the scope is interpolating from is ~745Gbps, while 400Gbps Ethernet is still fairly rare and mostly limited to backbones.
- justinsaccount 4y agoah yes, i see now: > ... this means we should catch 1-3 UDP packets. > After hunting down a USB key, I ended up with a 191M .wfm file to process. assuming 3 packets, that's about 64MB of raw data per ethernet frame. The tshark output shows a 82 byte frame. That works out to 818400:1 overhead. Close to 1MB of .wfm data per 1 byte of packet data. I suppose you could do some processing or compression closer to the input, but then you're just building a nic at that point.
- pheon 4y agowe are actually doing that now at https://fmad.io https://fmad.io for SDR instead of raw oscilloscope ADC. SDR is about an order of magnitude less data e.g. 6GS/sec instead of 60GS/sec and Matlab as the backend instead of Python.. as its a bit faster when mining terabytes of data for that ah-ha wtf bit. Surprisingly cool going from raw IQ/analog data to ethernet frames much like the op has written.