Re: [Live-devel] Performance degradiation in Windows

2017-01-06 Thread Hyung Jin Jung
As you presumed I just run single program and we use another tiny RTSP client to generate heavy load. (just stream, not decoding) Regarding socket descriptor limitation, I already increase it to 1024. Before do this, we stopped at 32 clients (32 * 2 sockets, RTP, RTCP) some strange thing is Why

Re: [Live-devel] Performance degradiation in Windows

2017-01-05 Thread Ross Finlayson
> We are encountered significant performance degradation when ports live555 to > windows from Linux. > Even though Window server has more powerful H/W spec. then Linux. > > Test scenario > 1. Run live555MediaServer (not modified) > 2. Connect client to server stream (H264, 720p, 2mbps, RTP over T

Re: [Live-devel] Performance imporved -- SingleStep improved

2011-07-28 Thread Ross Finlayson
On Jul 28, 2011, at 10:19 PM, xue wrote: > /* Here should process the queue data before get new frame from source, this > very important for IP net work camera, the video latency will 50ms shorter > than before. Zack */ > if (tv_timeToDelay.tv_sec == 0 && tv_timeToDelay.tv_usec == 0){ >

Re: [Live-devel] Performance imporved -- BasicTaskScheduler base linux epoll

2011-07-28 Thread Ross Finlayson
On Jul 28, 2011, at 10:21 PM, xue wrote: > Linux Epoll patch. Just for reference Thanks. However, I won't (can't) make such a change to the released code, because "epoll()" - unlike "select()" - is not portable across multiple OSs. It's important to understand that the "BasicTaskScheduler" cla

Re: [Live-devel] Performance

2007-06-04 Thread David Betrand
Hello Marc, We use liveMedia library in a server-side application and we noticed the same performance issue with DelayQueue class. We tried to optimize it but couldn't get good results. Would you mind if I ask you to share your optimized code ? Ross, I understand your point regarding embedded

Re: [Live-devel] Performance

2007-06-01 Thread Marc Neuberger
Ross Finlayson wrote: No, that's not correct. The RTSP server implementation's 'liveness check' timer gets rescheduled only after the receipt of an incoming *RTCP packet* (or an incoming RTSP command) - not on every (or any) outgoing packet. Ah good, that makes a great deal more sense. How

Re: [Live-devel] Performance

2007-06-01 Thread Ross Finlayson
>Studying the performance my own epoll()-based scheduler, I strongly >suspect that the far bigger source of inefficiency is the DelayQueue >implementation that BasicTaskScheduler0 uses. This queue is a linked >list, causing O(n) cost to adding and deleting timers. Which happens a >lot. If I underst