Lawrence Manning writes: > Dunno if this is valid, but here's my thoughts. > > It would be interesting to profile fg and determine exactly where the time > is spent. I'd guess that even a low spec machince could handle the > "simulation" aspects of the program; is it not the the rendering that > consumes the majority of the processing time?
That is what I have observed when I have profilled FlightGear myself. > I'm not quite sure how threads can help, except possibly with the > simulation of hundreds of aircraft at once? In the case of simulating 100's of aircraft, threads might provide a convenient programming abstraction, but they would add the overhead of many context switches. User space threads are pretty quick, but still there is some overhead to switch to a new thread. > Although threading out > scenery loading and sound both appear good ideas. > > It would be interesting to do some tests in wireframe mode on a low spec > machine and see how it performs? By default, OpenGL will texture, light, and shade the lines of the wire frame so this might not necessarily run as fast as you'd hope... :-) Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities curt 'at' me.umn.edu curt 'at' flightgear.org Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
