Hi Allen,
Allen Bierbaum wrote:
> [...]
>> I've profiled our app and 10% of the time in OSG-dlls is spent in
>> GetAspect(). That's quite a bit and therefore I'm happy to see
>> c-pointers being introduced in C++. Hopefully, it will also reduce
>> compile times & code size. (No more copy-ctoring of FCPtrs everywhere).
>
> Did your profiling separate application level use from internal use?
I did some benchmarks with my little python benchmark wrapper, and I got
to similar results (~10% in getAspect), and on that one the whole
application loop was "setCamera(); win->render();". So my guess would be
most of the time is internal.
Nonetheless I'm not sure what the problem is. If you have an app that
needs thread-sage pointer transfer, just use MTRefPtr for variable
storage and if you need a tight loop or copy things around use a normal
Ptr (or RefPtr, if needed).
> I
> agree that the current ptr's have too much overhead to use in
> performance critical sections of the internal code, but my assumption
> was/is that if an application (whether C++ or python based) uses
> aspect-safe RefPtr's that this overhead is minimal compared to the time
> spent on rendering, traversal, and all other things internal.
>
> I don't have any numbers to back this up though so I could be wrong. :)
It all depends on what you consider minimal. ;) 10% is not like a
hotspot, but IMHO too much to be called minimal.
Dirk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
