[PD] firm delay scheduling

[Jonathan Wilkes]

Are you using a GNU/Linux OS?

If so, why not just change the pd-watchdog ping-back period from 2 seconds to
250 milliseconds and recompile?  Then run Pd with realtime priorities.

I guess the question is: what does pd-watchdog actually do when it doesn't receive
the response in time?  Isn't it supposed to kill Pd?

-Jonathan



----- Original Message -----
> From: Jean-Marie Adrien <jma at jeanmarie-adrien.net>
> To: Roman Haefeli <reduzent at gmail.com>
> Cc: "pd-list at iem.at List" <pd-list at iem.at>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 6:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [PD] firm delay scheduling
> 
>T hanks everyone !
> Best practical way is probably communicate with another PD on multiprocessor 
> architecture though. 
> This is what I had in thought, but I wanted to post before implementing.
> JM
> 
> 
> Le 31 oct. 2012 à 09:12, Roman Haefeli a écrit :
> 
>>  On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 13:42 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>>>  [delay] is as firm as your going to get, from what I've seen.  
> [delay]
>>>  should be at least as accurate to about one audio block, so like
>>>  1.5ms, so if you only need 250ms accuracy, you have plenty of room.
>> 
>>  [delay] is not "somewhat precise", it is absolutely precise. 
> However,
>>  there are classes that ignore the precision of [delay] and treat
>>  incoming messages as if they would have been sent at block boundaries.
>>  For instance the phase inlets of [osc~] and [phasor~].
>> 
>>  What Jean-Adrien probably means by 'elastic' is not the lack of
>>  precision of [delay] in the deterministic scope of Pd, but the fact that
>>  it tied to that deterministic scope and thus is precise only in logical
>>  time, but not in real time. If the CPU load of Pd goes above 100%,
>>  logical time gets more and more behind real time. 
>> 
>>  Roman
>> 
>>>  .hc
>>> 
>>>  On Oct 30, 2012, at 1:13 PM, Jean-Marie Adrien wrote:
>>> 
>>>>  Hello
>>>>  I'm trying to launch security procedures in case of trouble, 
> that will respond in less than 250 msec.
>>>>  The fundamental question is :
>>>> 
>>>>  Is there an object to schedule an event in the future with firm 
> absolute delay ? 
>>>> 
>>>>  {realtime} measures time AFTER the problem (no scheduling)
>>>>  {del} schedules things but the delay is kind of elastic, depending 
> on the CPU load.
>>>> 
>>>>  thanks
>>>>  JM
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>  Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>>>>  UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>  Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>>>  UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>>  UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>