Am 16.11.2011 um 19:24 schrieb Michael Diehr: > On the server side, the memoryblock returned by FileMappingView.create can't > be set to an existing memoryblock (thus, requiring a copy operation)
Right. Some memory is mapped and returned as memory block. I can extend that, so you can pass in a memoryblock which is used for this avoiding the copy. > On the client side, the "The memoryblock has no known size" - does this mean > you can't use it for operations such as MemoryblockRGBAtoPictureMBS? and thus > a 2nd copy of the memoryblock would need to be made? The memory block here is a Ptr. It has an address, but Real Studio doesn't know the size of the memoryblock. I don't think that MemoryblockRGBAtoPictureMBS needs the size property here. > My worry is that if there are two extra copy operations (one on server end, > one on client end) that the shared memory may not be any faster than IPC > sockets. In general IPCSocket uses memory mapping behind the scences, so the question is whether it's much faster to do it yourself. Greetings Christian -- See you in Orlando, Florida for Real World 2012 More details and registration here: http://www.realsoftware.com/community/realworld.php _______________________________________________ Mbsplugins_monkeybreadsoftware.info mailing list [email protected] https://ml01.ispgateway.de/mailman/listinfo/mbsplugins_monkeybreadsoftware.info
