Hi Robert/all, Sorry for the hijack.... I appear to be missing posts on the mailing list? Never got Roberts reply on this post, I have noticed this happening for a few weeks with intermittent posts not coming through to the mailing list, mostly Roberts replies but I dont think it's just Roberts. Is there a problem, I have done the obvious like check junk-mail etc..
Regards Martin. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Riccardo Corsi Sent: 04 July 2010 23:07 To: OpenSceneGraph Users Subject: Re: [osg-users] StateSet sharing for max performance Hi Robert, I actually tested the 2 solutions and I can confirm there's only a negligible difference in the cull traversal time, drawing time is just the same. So far solution 2 fits much better with my application, so I can pay the little overhead. Thanks, Ricky On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 17:01, Robert Osfield <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ricky, > > The cull performance will be very slightly higher for method 2 as the > cull traversal will have to push/pop more state, but the draw > traversal will be identical between the two. There will be so little > difference in measurable performance I would suggest going for what > makes most sense for your application. > > Of course one should test this... it'd be easy to benchmark the two > configuration to make sure that there isn't a measurable difference. > > Robert. > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Riccardo Corsi > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> in my scene I have many drawables that share the same settings/glsl >> program - the needed params to render the different drawables are >> already passed in as vertex attributes at geometry level. >> I'd like to know it there's any difference, with respect to >> performances, if I share the common StateSet either one of the >> following methods: >> >> 1. share the common SS in a single geode >> >> geode1 - SS1 >> | >> |-------------------------------- >> | | | >> draw1 draw2 draw3 >> >> >> geode1 - SS2 >> | >> |-------------------------------- >> | | | >> draw11 draw12 draw13 >> >> >> >> 2. share the same instance of the SS (let's call them SS1 and SS2) at >> drawable level: >> >> geode >> | >> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- >> | | | >> | | | >> draw1--SS1 draw2--SS1 draw3--SS1 draw11--SS2 >> draw12--SS2 draw13--SS2 >> >> >> The second method would be preferable to me, as every drawable >> represents an independent object, and I might need to change the way >> it's rendered at runtime (see hilight, etc...). >> I'd like to know if there are some performance penalties with respect >> to method 1. >> >> Thanks a lot. >> Ricky >> _______________________________________________ >> osg-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org >> > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
