Hi,<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Arnold Krille <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:arnold@arnoldarts.de">arnold@arnoldarts.de</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
 And once the shmem is working, you can try to port some of that<br>
to osc too.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Is it acceptable to be sending ±4 sec worth of float samples across OSC? It sounds like quite a bit of data,</div><div>esp if the sampling rate goes upwards to 96... :-)</div>
<div><br></div><div>If that&#39;s possible I&#39;ll definatly be doing that, the reason I tried the &quot;same-binary&quot; approach was I presume that</div><div>doing the OSC transfer of lots of data was a bad idea.. I have no reason to like SHM, I&#39;ve never used it and it</div>
<div>doesn&#39;t scale if I want to run on two different machines. Which was the reason to control using OSC in the first place!</div><div><br></div><div>Summing up: Large data ( ±384,000 samples of float type ) OK to send with OSC? </div>
<div><br></div><div>Thanks for the swift reply! -Harry</div></div>