On 09/07/2011 08:54 AM, Pierre Ossman wrote:
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 01:40:48 -0500
DRC dcomman...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
As of now, with the ComparingUpdateTracker disabled and using our FLTK
viewer, the performance is at about 85-90% of TurboVNC
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 1 is
Under sponsorship by Cendio, I have completed an extensive (as in 100+
hours) set of performance optimizations to the TigerVNC Server in trunk,
which should bring its performance completely in line with TurboVNC,
provided that the ComparingUpdateTracker is disabled. I am
investigating the
OK, I'm an idiot. The TigerVNC Server with the ComparingUpdateTracker
disabled was not generating twice the data when the TurboVNC Viewer
connected. I had simply forgotten the way that TurboVNC maps its 1-100
quality scale to TigerVNC's 1-9 quality scale, so in fact I was
comparing JPEG quality
