> One last question: Let's assume fDurationInMicroseconds is 0; if the
> transmitting object immediately requests the next frame and doGetNextFrame()
> returns immediately because no frame is available, isn't there a risk that
> the application will use 100% of CPU?
No, because after returning
Hi Ross,
Thanks a lot for these details, that makes things a lot clearer.
One last question: Let's assume fDurationInMicroseconds is 0; if the
transmitting object immediately requests the next frame and doGetNextFrame()
returns immediately because no frame is available, isn't there a risk that t
On Sep 5, 2014, at 1:14 AM, Fabrice Triboix wrote:
> You're thinking about this the wrong way. "doGetNextFrame()" gets called
> automatically (by the downstream, 'transmitting' object) whenever it needs a
> new NAL unit to transmit. So you should just deliver the next NAL unit (just
> one!)
You're thinking about this the wrong way. "doGetNextFrame()" gets called
automatically (by the downstream, 'transmitting' object) whenever it needs a
new NAL unit to transmit. So you should just deliver the next NAL unit (just
one!) whenever "doGetNextFrame()" is called. If your encoder can g
>> Could it be that calling deliverFrame() multiple times might be wrong?
>
> Yes, that's wrong. Your "doGetNextFrame()" function should deliver one, and
> only one, H.264 NAL unit (note, not a H.264 'frame') each time it's called.
> [Fabrice] All right, that's good to know. From time to time,
Hi Ross,
Thanks a lot for your answers.
I have some comments/additional questions, inline in green below.
Many thanks for your help!
Fabrice
From: live-devel [live-devel-boun...@ns.live555.com] on behalf of Ross
Finlayson [finlay...@live555.com]
Sent: 04 Sep
