Re: [Flightgear-devel] multi-threading

[Jon S. B. <js...@ha...>]

VS Renganathan wrote:
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> 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.

Huh? I must've missed something. Note that this is the first message I
am posting from the new machine. Boy, am *I* a happy camper!!! Between
setting up the machine and burn-in, and "The Flood" I have been a little
out of it. Is this related to threading and distributed processing?
Sounds like it...

> > 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.

Too bad reflective memory is so expensive. That's one of the methods we
are using to communicate between a VME machine and our SGI. Pretty cool
stuff.

Jon