Re: [LAU] jack2 vs. jack1/zita vs. jack2+zita-a2j, performance differences

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Paul Davis <paul@...>
Cc: linux-audio-user <linux-audio-user@...>, Jonathan E. Brickman <jeb@...>
Date: Thursday, April 17, 2014 - 8:23 am

--001a11c37c9271c5a904f738be38
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Paul Davis wrote:

> so in those tests using -A SB, the bridge follows the server configuration

Ah, reading the 0.124.0 release notes it also seems that -A SB is
full-duplex, so perhaps a fair comparison after all?

--001a11c37c9271c5a904f738be38
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Paul Davis <paul@linuxaudiosys=
tems.com
> wrote:
so in those tests using -A SB, the bridge fo=
llows the server configuration and adds no latency.A=
h, reading the 0.124.0 release notes it also seems that -A SB is full-duple=
x, so perhaps a fair comparison after all?

--001a11c37c9271c5a904f738be38--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] jack2 vs. jack1/zita vs. jack2+zita-a2j, performance d..., Jonathan E. Brickman, (Thu Apr 17, 1:54 am)
Re: [LAU] jack2 vs. jack1/zita vs. jack2+zita-a2j, performan..., Jonathan E. Brickman, (Thu Apr 17, 12:36 pm)
Re: [LAU] jack2 vs. jack1/zita vs. jack2+zita-a2j, performan..., michael noble, (Thu Apr 17, 8:23 am)