Re: [LAD] [LAU] cancelling I/O with libsndfile

Dan Muresan wrote:

> Certainly not unique. My guess is that nobody worried about a
> (possibly small) performance penalty, and instead used simpler
> strategies -- or they weren't using sndfile in the first place.
>
> Consider this: for any request size you choose, NOT cancelling could
> double your latency in the worst case if you're streaming from a slow
> NFS server.

Err, if you're worried about latency, why are you streaming from
a slow NFS server?

> This begs a question -- is it possible to "reset" the SNDFILE less
> dramatically? E.g. would a seek back to offset 0, or a pair of seeks,
> or some other trick also reset the data structures?

Really not sure. You should try it and report back.

> If not, it might
> be nice to add a sf_reset() function or a SF_RESET sf_command()
> parameter.

What problem does that fix? Do you even know if there is a problem?

Erik

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev