Re: [reSIProcate] Timers: why system time?
Hi Alexander,
My only concern is the use of QPC. It has a few issues
(http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274323
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb173458(VS.85).aspx) and is one of
the more CPU intensive timer calls. It seems that every timer has its
issues, and there is a lot of info on the web about windows timers, but
resip may be able to use GetTickCount. It's the fastest of the available
timer calls, but has the worst accuracy (10-55ms on average, depending on
CPU load and underlying platform). This should be accurate enough for resip
though. It's also a 32-bit timer, so appropriate measures need to be taken
when comparing timing values, etc.
Whatever is chosen, I hope that the functionality can be wrapped in timer
classes and could be swapped out with different time functions down the road
if needed.
Thanks,
-justin
-----Original Message-----
From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alexander
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 8:53 AM
To: 'resiprocate-devel'
Subject: Re: [reSIProcate] Timers: why system time?
Hi All
Does the community have any interest in using monotonic instead of
absolute timers within reSIProcate stack?
After some investigation I have found acceptable for me solution for
Windows and Linux (Posix) platforms.
I may post here some details and even patch (later) if somebody will be
interested.
With best regards
Alexander Altshuler
Xeepe project
http:xeepe.com
_______________________________________________
resiprocate-devel mailing list
resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel