Frank Sullivan wrote on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 3:26 PM:
> Slow App
> -----
> Lights: 0
> Bins: 30
> Depth: 0
> Matrices: 15,789
> Imposters: 0
> Drawables: 15,789
> Vertices: 1,361,039
> 
> Quick App (without Object Cache)
> -----
> Lights: 0
> Bins: 9
> Depth: 0
> Matrices: 1,379
> Imposters: 0
> Drawables: 1,379
> Vertices: 299,982
> 
> Quick App (with Object Cache)
> -----
> Lights: 0
> Bins: 9
> Depth: 0
> Matrices: 1,379
> Imposters: 0
> Drawables: 1379
> Vertices: 300,530
> 
> I'm not sure exactly what these numbers mean. I thought that perhaps
they
> referred to the total number of objects in the scene graph, whether
visible
> or invisible, and whether or not they are in the viewing frustum.
However, I
> noticed that the numbers change slightly depending on where I place
the
> camera (therefore, I tried to place the camera in the same position
for each
> of the data samples above to get the most comparable results). Also,
if that
> were the case, then Quick App (with Object Cache) should have numbers
> comparable to Slow App -- they both have the exact same objects loaded
and
> attached to the scene graph. However, both versions of the Quick App
have
> similar numbers, while the Slow App numbers are way, way higher.

> 
> If anyone can help explain what these stats actually refer to, I think
I may
> be able to track this problem down. 

I believe they refer to the number of Drawables, Vertices, etc. that are
actually rendered. It appears that your slow app is rendering about 4-5
times the number of objects. Perhaps it has multiple cameras or render
passes that the quick app does not? Perhaps models are getting added
multiple times at the same location? How do the numbers change when you
add a single model and how is that change different between the two
apps?

HTH,
-- 
Bryan Thrall
FlightSafety International
bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org

Reply via email to