20 Feb
2006
20 Feb
'06
4:07 p.m.
On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 08:24 -0800, thewade wrote:
Quoting Ismael Valladolid Torres
<ivalladt(a)punkass.com>om>:
This is all well and good but you're only talking about CPU. Disk
I/O is another story entirely. If your WM starts doing some I/O that
you weren't aware of you may get an xrun because you couldn't access the
disk in time. This is the reason that I kill syslogd before I record.
Granted, generally speaking you'll do OK due to the priority of your
process but disk I/O takes a certain amount of time and you can't
interrupt it once it's gone to the disk.
--
Jan 'Evil Twin' Depner
The Fuzzy Dice
http://myweb.cableone.net/eviltwin69/fuzzy.html
"As we enjoy great advantages from the invention of others, we should be
glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours, and
this we should do freely and generously."
Benjamin Franklin, on declining patents offered by the governor of
Pennsylvania for his "Pennsylvania Fireplace", c. 1744
If you're trying to get the lowest latency posible it's dumb having a
desktop system that eats half your resources.
I think what Lee is saying is that with realtime-lsm (and ingo's
spin-locking?), jackd, your audio apps, and limits.conf all set up
right all processes bow to your audio apps. So audio will still get the
lowest latency possible independant of other threads running on your
machine, including the window manager. The screen may not refresh as
frequently or be as responsive, but you should incur no addidional
XRUNS from using one window manager over another.
Am I right?