Re: [Linuxsampler-devel] LinuxSampler control protocol (initial draft)

[David O. <da...@ol...>]

On Thursday 01 January 2004 15.48, Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
> benno wrote:
> > As said ASCII is elegant etc but does it pay off to waste
> > network and cpu resources (and programming resources because
> > ASCII requires parsers) ?
> >
> > I'd like to hear your opinions about ASCII vs binary from you
> > guys.
>
> IMO assuming the lscp service is implemented on a different thread
> than the midi/audio ones, the performance penalty of ASCII vs.
> binary parsing is cheap nowadays.

Yes, we are talking about hundreds of cycles per command, which is=20
practically nothing - *provided* there are only tens or maybe=20
hundreds of commands per second.

So, what kind of traffic volumes are we expecting? What kind of=20
relation does the traffic volume have to the CPU power of the server=20
machine? (You probably wouldn't be chatting about the states of 128=20
channels if the server only has CPU power for 32 voices.)


[...]
> I would suggest that we first specify and implement on ASCII. If
> someone would take the task, the binary dialect might be also an
> alternative (e.g. via different tcp and udp ports).

Makes sense. Let's not optimize before we're actually sure it could=20
make a difference. :-)


//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate

=2E- Audiality -----------------------------------------------.
|  Free/Open Source audio engine for games and multimedia.  |
| MIDI, modular synthesis, real time effects, scripting,... |
`-----------------------------------> http://audiality.org -'
   --- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---