Re: [PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ?
Ah wow. Looks like I may be able to use that with minimal changes to the patch! Thanks Andras, I'll give that a go. --- On Sun, 28/2/10, András Murányi muran...@gmail.com wrote: From: András Murányi muran...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ? To: pd list pd-list@iem.at Cc: saint sainti...@yahoo.com Date: Sunday, 28 February, 2010, 16:17 On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:14 AM, saint sainti...@yahoo.com wrote: Thanks guys, So loading to RAM seems to be the solution. Anyone have any ideas how I do that in WinXP? Or what would the alternative methods of data storage that PD (vanilla) provides natively that operates to/from RAM? Sounds like you need something like the good old msdos ramdisk. May be this one: http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/05/27/free-ramdisk-for-windows-vista-xp-2000-and-2003-server/ Andras ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ?
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:14 AM, saint sainti...@yahoo.com wrote: Thanks guys, So loading to RAM seems to be the solution. Anyone have any ideas how I do that in WinXP? Or what would the alternative methods of data storage that PD (vanilla) provides natively that operates to/from RAM? Sounds like you need something like the good old msdos ramdisk. May be this one: http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/05/27/free-ramdisk-for-windows-vista-xp-2000-and-2003-server/ Andras ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ?
Thanks guys, So loading to RAM seems to be the solution. Anyone have any ideas how I do that in WinXP? Or what would the alternative methods of data storage that PD (vanilla) provides natively that operates to/from RAM? ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ?
saint wrote: Thanks guys, So loading to RAM seems to be the solution. Anyone have any ideas how I do that in WinXP? Or what would the alternative methods of data storage that PD (vanilla) provides natively that operates to/from RAM? __ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list If I understand correctly, once you have loaded a file into either [textfile] or an [array] the data itself is stored in ram. So, the solution should be to load all patterns that are to be used into ram using one or both of these objects. If using [textfile] and importing multiple files you could use two instances of [textfile]. One which reads the files (one by one in any order you want), and outputs all the data into a second [textfile]. The second textfile does not read from file. It only holds the data. Then you just need to rewind and bang. I've been working on creating a sequencer which can record and play simple midi-style data. For that I use tabread/tabwrite and tables/arrays. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ?
Can't you simply load the files in exactly the same way you do now, but instead of doing it on demand (load a single file when the data it contains is needed), load all them at startup (into [textfile] objects, [list]s or arrays) and access them later?? -- Matteo Sisti Sette matteosistise...@gmail.com http://www.matteosistisette.com ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
[PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ?
Hi all, I've a pd system that involves the playing back of sequences and patterns. I store the pattern data in lots of separate text files which the system reads on the fly once the next pattern is called upon. My problem is that I get audio dropouts when changing some patterns, usually ones that call on a lot of text files. (I've put all the graphic-heavy stuff into a subpatch which remains closed during live playback as my initial feeling was the glitches were caused by graphical stuff as is usual with pd. But surely once in a subpatch and closed there's no overhead?) I suppose what I'm asking is, would I get better performance if I wasn't constantly calling upon text files on the hard disk? Say, saving the strings of numbers to lists or arrays? What would the best way to go about that if so? The reason I went for the text file route was that it was simple to re-order the sequences via a file manager and just generally easier to track down problems by inspecting the files rather than poking around in lists and arrays. But audio always has final say! Thanks in advance as always, John. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ?
I solved this problem by copying the files in RAM, on a virtual disk, prior to playing from the patch. On Linux, I have a shell script that copies to /dev/shm then symlink to the folder where the patch resides, then start pd and it runs smoothly. As long as your files dont take up much space in memory, it's fine. Otherwise, they shouldn't sum up more than half the total RAM of your machine, otherwise it swaps. I have no idea how to use this technique with Win/Mac. ++ O. saint wrote: Hi all, I've a pd system that involves the playing back of sequences and patterns. I store the pattern data in lots of separate text files which the system reads on the fly once the next pattern is called upon. My problem is that I get audio dropouts when changing some patterns, usually ones that call on a lot of text files. (I've put all the graphic-heavy stuff into a subpatch which remains closed during live playback as my initial feeling was the glitches were caused by graphical stuff as is usual with pd. But surely once in a subpatch and closed there's no overhead?) I suppose what I'm asking is, would I get better performance if I wasn't constantly calling upon text files on the hard disk? Say, saving the strings of numbers to lists or arrays? What would the best way to go about that if so? The reason I went for the text file route was that it was simple to re-order the sequences via a file manager and just generally easier to track down problems by inspecting the files rather than poking around in lists and arrays. But audio always has final say! Thanks in advance as always, John. ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Textfile vs. Lists vs. Arrays vs. ?
Hallo, saint hat gesagt: // saint wrote: I suppose what I'm asking is, would I get better performance if I wasn't constantly calling upon text files on the hard disk? Yes. Hard disk access is a real latency killer and it's only save if done in a separate thread like readsf~ does it. So either use some kind of memory disk as suggested here as well, or load files into memory in whatever fashion suits you. Ciao -- Frank ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
