Hallo, Christian Klippel hat gesagt: // Christian Klippel wrote:
hello iohannes and all,
Am Samstag 19 November 2005 00:13 schrieb IOhannes m zmoelnig: [...snip...]
please note, that the word "latency" is nowhere mentioned. it has nothing to do with "realtime". (you can have a hard realtime system that has a delay of 1 week). so pd is by design a realtime system.
ouch! that comment about hard realtime is plain wrong. hard realtime is used in systems where you need minimal delay, like engine controls, medical systems, etc.
imagine your life support systems would use hard realtime that can delay up to a week .....
the most important aspect of hard realtime systems (like rtlinux) is that they have the lowest latency possible!
also, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_computing
There I read something different, though:
A distinction can be made between those systems which will suffer a critical failure if time constraints are violated (hard or immediate real-time), and those which will not (soft real-time).
Note that this doesn't mention the size of the latency at all, it just speaks about violations of "time constraints", which themselves could be nanoseconds or years. Later on the same page:
It is important to note that hard versus soft real-time does not necessarily relate to the length of time available.
Q.e.d. ;)
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__