31 Jul
2004
31 Jul
'04
12:26 p.m.
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 04:07:15 -0700, Malcolm Baldridge wrote:
That wouldn't affect the CPU load on a remote machine. The current release
uses SDL, which problably isn't very romte friendly.
- Steve
Comparatively, Meterbridge is responsible for
blowing _loads_ of CPU
cycles (as reported by Qjackctl) - Alsaplayer/Ardour graphics aren't
loading the remote box to anything like the same extent.
I'll try to make some comparative CPU measurements whilst recording and
report back, but it looks to me as though Meterbridge (probably via a
library) isn't making as efficient use of X as it might.
It's very possible that Meterbridge's "waste" isn't in the X calls,
but the
way in which it collects information and/or performs I/O in general. Years
ago when I first started to dabble in open source code and came upon a
fairly popular IRC client called "BitchX". The author of that client
decided in his infinite wisdom to basically cpu-spin on non-blocking I/Os
for "petty" network transfers, thereby wasting about 85+% CPU to oversee a
single client-to-client transfer that was probably running at 2-4
kilobytes/second, tops. It was insanely bad code.