On 6/2/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Arie van Schutterhoef</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:arsche@xs4all.nl">arsche@xs4all.nl</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
&gt;about having the dsp running on seperate cpu's simultanously<br>&gt;<a href="http://music.york.ac.uk/rimm/tech.htm">http://music.york.ac.uk/rimm/tech.htm</a></blockquote><div><br>It would be possible for Pd to use the same Unix shm (and the Win32 equivalent) but some sort of sync system would probably be needed to keep the buffers moving along and not outputting duplicate or partial DSP frames.&nbsp; I put a very non-sync shm object in GEM which works fine for video as that is more forgiving of minor problems compared to audio.&nbsp; 
<br><br>Jack is another possiblity to spread DSP over multiple processes.&nbsp; It might be possible for Pd to open several processes and manage them using one patcher although I have no idea about that feasibility.<br></div><br>
</div><br>