has anyone been using pd~ successfully ?

I am trying it out, but i get very poor results.

It seems like a patch loaded with pd~ is a lot heavier than the same loaded as a regular abstraction (DIO errors, see also my message "pd~ and DIO errors").

I assumed it would run on another processor core...but does it?

Is there a way to check this?

thanks!

2010/4/5 Jaime Oliver <jaime.oliver2@gmail.com>

hey vedran,

pd~ is a way of opening another instance of pd from within a patch.

ideally you want gem and sound on separate instances (connected via udp, pd~ or some other way). each of these processes will use one processor.

nicely enough, pd's graphical interface and the actual process, are separate threads, so you (or more precisely your OS) might have them in separate processors if needed.

for sound, you can create objects in faust and make multithreaded audio externals.

other than that, the processes in a patch are single threaded.

J

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 2:59 AM, vedran <vedran.kolac@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi!
can someone tell me if one instance of pd (with gem) can use more than one core on multi-core processor?

.....................................................
vedran kolac
.....................................................
gTalk - vedran.kolac@gmail.com
.....................................................
skype - vedrankolac
.....................................................
+385 (0) 91 567 07 17
.....................................................
http://www.onoxo.net
http://www.projectmoe.net
.....................................................

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

--
Jaime E Oliver LR

www.jaimeoliver.pe

858 750 0924 (cel)
858 202 1522 (home)
9168 Regents Rd. Apt. G
La Jolla, CA 92037
USA

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list