You are writing to a file in a blocking thread, its not the CPU it's the hard drive. You should try the program without the write. Then if it is the problem you should write out to a file on a ram disk then save it to a real disk later.
2012/2/24 Wu Ting <wu.t...@comf5.comm.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp>: > Hi! Thank you for your suggestions! > > I realized it is a problem related with computer speed. Today I used a > laptop to run the same code, and 'O' is printed much more frequently. > > However, the computer I'm using is a quite good one. It has intel i7 > 3.4GHz 8-core, and when the code is running, CPU is only used by about > 10%, and memory is also used by no more than 15%. On the other hand, I > also checked number of messages in message queue, and I've found that when > 'O' is printed, sometimes there are only several messages in the queue. So > I don't understand why it has this outflow problem. > > And is it possible to catch this error when it happens, so that I can deal > with it in the problem? > > Thanks! > > Wu > >> 2012/2/23 Wu Ting <wu.t...@comf5.comm.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp> >> >>> Hi! Thank you for your response. I've kept working on this problem for >>> two >>> days, but still cannot find a way to solve it. >>> >>> I simplified the program and have determined that the 'O' is produced is >>> this while loop: >>> >>> while msgCount<10000: >>> msg = tb.queue.delete_head() >>> payload = msg.to_string() >>> f.write(payload) >>> msgCount += 1 >>> >>> I also tried to make it sleep for a short time after each operation: >>> >>> while msgCount<10000: >>> msg = tb.queue.delete_head() >>> sleep(0.00001) >>> payload = msg.to_string() >>> sleep(0.00001) >>> f.write(payload) >>> sleep(0.00001) >>> msgCount += 1 >>> >> >> Two quick things. First, the tb.queue.delete_head() is a blocking call, so >> it will wait until there is a message to process. You don't need to sleep. >> Adding a sleep call here is probably only making things worse since you're >> already not keeping up with the samples. Second, the sleep() call is >> generally only accurate to about ~10 ms, but you're asking it to sleep for >> 10 us. I'm not sure if it rounds up or down. Worse case, you're making the >> loop sleep for about 30 ms total; best case is you actually aren't pausing >> at all. >> >> Tom >> > > _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
