[Jackit-devel] Re: [PD-announce] Re: [linux-audio-dev] ANN: k_jack v0.0.0.5 and Mammut v0.15

[Anders Torger]

On Wednesday 22 January 2003 10.21, Kjetil S. Matheussen wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Paul Davis wrote:
> > >k_jack is a jack reimplementation
> >
> > why? given that we have not even finished the initial
> > implementation, why?
>
> 1. I didnt' use much time on this. It was made most to test my new
> libaipc library. Its not at all complete either.
>
>
>
> 2. It was a provocation. :)
>
> For two years (or somethings), people have complained about the bad
> performance of the jack system. And I don't think it has been solved.
> I dont know about alsa; and doesn't understand the driver-code, so it
> was easier for me just to reimplement jack.

Interesting, I have not seen any complaints on the performance... what 
part of the performance is bad? If there is a performance problem it is 
probably just to fix that part. A reimplementation is only necessary if 
the overall design is completely broken, and well, is it really? Why?

Or, more simply put, why is your implementation better performing than 
the "official"? And how have you measured that it is better?

Claiming better performance, and suggesting that the current JACK system 
sucks does require some explanation you know :-)

> k_jack performs okey. You dont have to run things with realtime
> priority.

Yes you do. No reliable low latency without realtime priority. 

/Anders Torger