That did help a bit. It will still spike to 60-100% occasionally but its a noticeable difference. Now its mostly between 3-20% CPU.
In lumenvox there is a way to tell the speech engine to only detect when the soundfile is finished playing. Is there a way to do that here? or is it set to interrupt-speaker mode all the time..? Fred On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Brian West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please SVN update you'll see 1-6% cpu on the detector also cd libs; rm -rf > pocketsphinx* sphinxbase* > I'm pretty sure that was the issue .. I made it stop feeding the recognizer > when we stopped talking. > > /b > > > > On Jul 14, 2008, at 12:30 PM, Frederick Jabre wrote: > > > Very well. Even at 30-40% CPU we'll have problem's scaling. Some more > testing reveals that it's probably somewhere between 40-100% for 9 out of 10 > of interps BUT interestingly enough the footprint in memory is quite low as > compared to lumenvox, hovering around 3-5% mem usage compared to lumenvox's > 25%-30% memory for a single interp. Ouch..! > > Some weird trade-off..? Memory for CPU usage. I hate those. Space/Time > tradeoff crap. Brings back memories from comp lab... > > I'll toss some conditional additional cash at him if he can optimize this > further. ;) > > Fred > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Brian West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It wasn't doing this till he did some fixes for the confidence score. >> I know when I was working on and testing while we were writing >> mod_pocketsphinx it sure didn't jump like that.. 30-40% tops with a >> few spikes to 100%. I personally tossed some money at him for the >> confidence score stuff which is the root of the evilness 100% cpu I >> suspect because it didn't do that before those last few changes went in. >> >> /b >> >> On Jul 14, 2008, at 11:35 AM, Frederick Jabre wrote: >> >> > >> > What kind of hardware you running it on? This has been going to >> > 100% CPU almost every time it does an interp for me. >> > Tested on my P4 box and my AMD 4200+ Dual both with 1GB ram. Both >> > with the same awful results. This can't be right given this thing >> > was designed to run on an ARM processor. >> > >> > I emailed Dave about it as well. Perhaps we need to incent him >> > more ;) >> > >> > Fred >> >> Brian West >> sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Freeswitch-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users >> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users >> http://www.freeswitch.org >> > > _______________________________________________ > Freeswitch-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > Brian West > sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freeswitch-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > >
_______________________________________________ Freeswitch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
