On 9/7/11 7:54 AM, Pierre Ossman wrote:
>> The viewer GUI has also been modified to reflect the findings from the
>> low-level performance study (specifically, that compression levels
>> higher than 3 rarely have any benefit and compression levels higher than
>> 6 never do. Also, compression level
This change makes absolutely no sense. Please understand that this code
took hundreds of hours to develop and test. Any change to it will
require significant re-testing. Unless you are willing to do that
re-testing, please do not touch it without seeking my approval first.
Please be prepared to
On 09/07/2011 08:54 AM, Pierre Ossman wrote:
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 01:40:48 -0500
DRC wrote:
As of now, with the ComparingUpdateTracker disabled and using our FLTK
viewer, the performance is at about 85-90% of TurboVNC at the high
levels, and the rema
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 01:40:48 -0500
DRC wrote:
> As of now, with the ComparingUpdateTracker disabled and using our FLTK
> viewer, the performance is at about 85-90% of TurboVNC at the high
> levels, and the remaining gap is entirely due to the viewer. The server
> CPU usage is now almost exactly
> @@ -43,6 +44,16 @@
>const int pseudoEncodingCompressLevel0 = -256;
>const int pseudoEncodingCompressLevel9 = -247;
>
> + // TurboVNC-specific
> + const int pseudoEncodingFineQualityLevel0 = -512;
> + const int pseudoEncodingFineQualityLevel100 = -412;
> + const int pseudoEncodingSub
