ti, 2010-02-09 kello 11:17 -0500, Bill Cox kirjoitti: > The corking stuff in PA is very cool. I don't think anyone objects to > it. But couldn't we quell all the "PA stinks!" posts by just allowing > some processes/groups/users to have constant access to audio?
That's easier said than done. Only one process can have direct access to the sound card at a time. Each user has his own pulseaudio instance running. How do you implement constant access in such scenario? I fear it would require a major redesign effort in pulseaudio. I haven't seen any concrete design proposals enabling simultaneous access for multiple users while at the same time retaining all the desirable properties that the current system has. > I guess the only other really nasty e-mails I read about PA are due to > old unmaintained code (typically games) that have too much delay in > PA. Is there any good reason that the default latency in PA for > programs that don't bother setting a desired latency is greater than > zero? You can't have zero latency, so I assume you mean why don't we use the smallest latency possible by default. The reason is that low latency consumes more cpu and battery time. -- Tanu Kaskinen _______________________________________________ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@mail.0pointer.de https://tango.0pointer.de/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
