On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Bruce Layne <linux...@thinkingdevices.com>wrote:
> > On 10/08/2012 01:02 PM, andy pugh wrote: > > > There shouldn't be any need for that much effort, you can boot from > > the LiveCD and run the latency test from there, without making any > > changes. Should only take 10 minutes, and if it fails then the machine > is still > > just as it was. > > That was my initial thought, as I've done the quick Live CD latency test > on many used (free and almost free) PCs, but I thought maybe Roland had > latency problems that cropped up in use, after the initial latency > test. I had read of some machines with once-a-day kind of latency > glitches. > I have a machine that runs latency tests just fine and then gives me a real-time error when I start LCNC. Never really tracked it down because I always intended just to move on to a new machine. It can be frustrating. I think the era of machines that fail latency peaked when the P4 was new, but I'm not really sure about that. I suspect that Mach also runs better on machines with low latency and the machines that LCNC complains about also don't run Mach as well as they might. It's just that Mach ignores the long intervals, mostly because step/dir machines are somewhat immune to that issue. Eric ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
