Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] It's time to vote (n. 1)
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Fri May 25 2001 - 13:22:59 EEST
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 04:52:26PM -0400, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2001, Darwin Marcus Johnson wrote:
>
> > > Collisions. The packets back off (exponentially I think) so they can get
> > > shuffled easily.
> > >
> > > There is more going on over ethernet than you think.
> > >
> > could this be avoided using two interfaces, and no hub?
>
> It seems to me that the problem is that UDP makes absolutly no promise
> about the order the packets come in. So even with a certain hardware
> setup that maintains the packet order (if such a thing is even possible),
> there would still need to be code to handle the out of order situation or
> it would be incorrect. And even if the packets were in order 99% of the
> time, the 1% would still have to be handled. So it's not a matter of
> removing the traffic from the link.
That is true, but I never got round to putting the orer handling code in
my benchmark code (just left an exit(1) in there) and it never got called,
in quarter of a million test packets.
I was being easy on the network, but even so.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri May 25 2001 - 14:12:33 EEST