Re: [ecasound] -z:intbuf

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [ecasound] -z:intbuf
From: Kai Vehmanen (
Date: Wed May 30 2001 - 02:46:10 EEST

On Wed, 16 May 2001, S. Massy wrote:

> Recently I noticed a great decrease in stability when doing simple
> playback with ecasound, where the smallest thing, and sometimes nothing
> at all, would trigger xruns. Today I finally understood that it is

Btw; have you tested with other drivers than ALSA 0.9.x... I'm getting
quite a lot of xruns with 0.9.x, and I'm not sure who to blame here. It
might be that ecasound is using the new ALSA API inefficiently, or a bug
in my soundcard's lowlevel drivers, or... Anyway, a benchmark between
different drivers (old ALSA, OSS/kernel, OSS/com) wouldn't hurt at this

> operation. However, internal buffering is a great helper when only one
> of the IO's is real-time and the other is not. So should it be enabled
> or disabled by default? I suppose there's no right or wrong answer to

Until you have an effect that you want control in realtime with your MIDI
controller... then -z:nointbuf is once again useful, even though you have
only one rt object.

> this as it depends on what sort of operation the user performs most
> often. I therefore suggest to make it a config file option just like
> -z:db, something like "enable-internal-buffering = true/false" so that
> people would be free to choose whichever behaviour they prefer.

True, this should be added. But which setting should be the default, now
that's a difficult one. With -z:nointbuf, people might experience ecasound
as unstable, while with -z:intbut, you get weird latency problems...?

 Audio software for Linux!

-- To unsubscribe send message 'unsubscribe' in the body of the message to <>.

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed May 30 2001 - 02:54:30 EEST