Infobyte S.R.L. (MC9258++at++mclink.it)
Thu, 21 Apr 94 15:34:14 CEST
I'm running Performer 1.2 (1.1 documentation) on a 3 pipe (RE^2) Onyx
with MCO and 8 150MHz R4400's. Each pipe is divided into 2 1280x1024's for a
total of 6 video channels. Due to the geometry of the display surface and
the projection system, this requires 6 individual channels in Performer.
The projection system blends an overlap of adjacent images and a separate
pespective calculation is required for each channel, so I can not run as a
3 channel system with larger viewports. Initially, I started writing code
from "scratch" and was able to get a 6 channel scene up and running, but with
approximately half the frame rate of perfly. I proceded to modify perfly to
display the proper geometry. I'm a performer newbie so it is very possible
that I did not change all of the required code. The modified perfly's frame
rate dropped to approximately half of the rate of the unmodified version.
Guesses as to why ...
- I need to add additional logic to the cull callback
- The unmodified version only runs 3 channels and the modified version
must transform twice the number of polygons for a 6 channel scene.
- Not enough processors for 6 channels with draw and cull for each
channel
- Other
Questions
- How many processes should run for optimal performance for 6
channels ? 1 app with 1 cull and 1 draw per channel (total 13)?
or 1 app with 1 cull and 1 draw per pipe (total 7) ? or 1 app
with 1 cull per channel and 1 draw per pipe (total 10) ? I didn't
quite understand how the multiprocess configuration options treated
channels versus pipes.
Any information would be appreciated...
Mark Visconti
LTSI, WPAFB, Dayton, OH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:50:15 PDT