22 Jan
2003
22 Jan
'03
5:56 a.m.
On Wednesday 22 January 2003 10.21, Kjetil S. Matheussen wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Paul Davis wrote:
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 is
a jack reimplementation
why? given that we have not even finished the initial
implementation, why? 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