On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 07:10:11PM -0700, Stephen Fisher wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 02:36:11AM +0100, didier wrote:
> > Le mardi 24 f?vrier 2009 ? 13:54 +0100, Anders Broman a ?crit :
> > > The bug report now has a test file.
> > Where?
>
> It's a private bug, so only certain people can vie
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 02:36:11AM +0100, didier wrote:
> Le mardi 24 f?vrier 2009 ? 13:54 +0100, Anders Broman a ?crit :
> > The bug report now has a test file.
> Where?
It's a private bug, so only certain people can view it. It's probably
private because of the capture file that is attached.
Hi,
Le mardi 24 février 2009 à 13:54 +0100, Anders Broman a écrit :
> Hi,
> I tried reseisable=FALSE without any noticable improvment. The bug report now
> has a test file.
Where?
Thanks
Didier
___
Sent via:Wireshark-de
: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Performance issues with the "new" rtp-analysis.c
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:32:13PM +0100, Anders Broman wrote:
> There seems to be quite a performance hit with using the TreeView
> Widget:
> Does some one know if it's possible to tweak the code to
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 04:37:48PM -0700, Stephen Fisher wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:32:13PM +0100, Anders Broman wrote:
>
> > Does some one know if it's possible to tweak the code to get better
> > performance or is it best to back out the new code and retackle The
> > old bug ? https:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:32:13PM +0100, Anders Broman wrote:
> There seems to be quite a performance hit with using the TreeView
> Widget:
> Does some one know if it's possible to tweak the code to get better
> performance or is it best to back out the new code and retackle The
> old bug ? h
Hi,
There seems to be quite a performance hit with using the TreeView
Widget:
>From the bug reporter:
>the trace file has only one stream (it's 6 minutes of HDTV), 44
RTP-packets... (and the file is 50MBytes, this was the setting during
>capture) The decoding is done for Ethernet/IP/UDP/RTP (n
