Re: [Flightgear-devel] multi-threading

[VS R. <aki...@ya...>]

Hi David,

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Megginson" <da...@me...>
> Eventually, it might be a good idea to externalize the FDM as well, so
> that the integration issues with JSBSim (and any others) become
> simpler, but it still sounds like a great start.

Ok, Once I get started I'll check with John Berndt.

> First, if you want to get the changes into the main distro, you'll
> need buy-in from Curt, and he'll need to be confident that at least a
> plurality of major contributors actually like the idea (as you know,
> it has my vote).

I dont see this listed as one the goals in the FlightGear homepage, but the
tile-pager thread was not listed too. So I beleive everyone would like to
have an improvement in performance if its demonstrated. So I'll postpone
asking Curt until I'm ready.

>
> Next, you need to decide how the processes are going to communicate.
> Personally, I prefer sockets so that you're not limited to running on
> a single SMP machine (you could run the FDM somewhere else on your
> subnet, for example); a lot of other posters seem to prefer shared
> memory.

When I first learnt socket programming I remember having read that if two
processes communicate using sockets on the same host the results could be
*unpredictable*. What do you say about this. Since we have to be able to run
FlightGear on a single processor machine as well, would it not be better to
distinguish the two as suggested by Alex Perry.

Thanks
Regards
Ranga



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com