Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In Run 1 there were several buffer underruns which slowed the DVD recorders
> > down. In Run 2 the buffer was always at 100% (except for the end of
> > course) :-).
> >
>
> This seems reasonable, what were the performance numbers for the other
> system activity? I'm surprised at the underruns, cdrecord has internal
> fifo, and I thought you did, too. With a hacked cdrecord (around a50)
> the burn ran almost eight seconds slower, regardless of burn size, and
> never dropped below 92% full at the drive, and 70% or so in the fifo.
Hacked how?
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
