*BSD News Article 91726


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!acsu.buffalo.edu!whitley
From: whitley@cs.buffalo.edu (John Whitley)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.sys.sgi.misc
Subject: Re: no such thing as a "general user community"
Date: 21 Mar 1997 22:53:24 GMT
Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo/Comp Sci
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <5gv3h4$968@prometheus.acsu.buffalo.edu>
References: <331BB7DD.28EC@net5.net> <5gs1de$k3s@flea.best.net> <5gsgsm$c5l@gazette.engr.sgi.com> <5gt4n5$9cc@flea.best.net>
Reply-To: whitley@cs.buffalo.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: hadar.cs.buffalo.edu
NNTP-Posting-User: whitley
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:37512 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:6419 comp.sys.sgi.misc:29339

Matt Dillon <dillon@flea.best.net> wrote:
>:Doug Cook <cook@candiru.engr.sgi.com> wrote:
>:>I disagree. Latency is the main bottleneck for multitrack sound 
>:>editing, particularly where many tracks are involved and short 
>:>edits are permitted.
>:>
>:>	-Doug
>
>    Only if the software is badly designed.  16 bits at 44KHz is
>    barely 100KBytes/sec.  One disk alone can do 8 MBytes/sec
>    in linear transfer rate.  Even if you have to seek 20 times a second
>    you will still get 4 MBytes/sec over the entire disk... and
>    that's ONE disk.  If you have, say, four 2G disks dedicated
>    to your edit stream, we're talking around 120 to 160 FULL-bandwidth
>    tracks running in parallel without any fancy filesystem support.
>
>					-Matt
   
A) Oh, yes, let's just do it all in the application software.  Hell,
   let's just chuck out the operating system and compiler overhead
   all-together and write in assembly code.  "Well designed" software
   should be able to coexist with other "well designed" sfotware
   without any resource contentions, eh?  :-PPP

B) Your "four 2G disks" assumes one of two things: that the filesystem
   supports disk striping (such as... XFS) or that the application
   must handle the multiple disk streams itself (with the necessary
   user setup and programmer overhead.  what-ever.).

C) Four 2G disks more or less implies "fixed studio installation".  I
   agree that high bandwidth makes life easier, but it is no
   solution.

D) FIFOs increase latency.  Latency is a killer in realtime audio
   applications.

E) This doesn't provide a _guarantee_.  A number of critical audio
   applications where systems like this will be employed require
   certainty, not supposition.

F) One phrase: "Realtime multimedia web serving."  May not be
   huge now, but just wait a week or two at this pace...

G) Another phrase: "Realtime interactive computer music."  Escaped from
   the DSP card cage and coming to general purpose hardware near you...

H) You would have been right had you tried to say "a minority of users
   require bandwidth guarantees in the here and now".  What you did
   say is that "no one needs bandwidth guarantees except video
   editors."  This statement is wrong, period.

-- John