Re: multiple pfChannels vs. multiple pfPipes

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Aaron Hightower (aaron++at++qbert.dseg.ti.com)
Thu, 16 Jun 1994 15:30:21 -0500 (CDT)

"Attribution from author Drew Hess"
> From holodeck.asd.sgi.com!guest Thu Jun 16 15:09:57 1994
> From: "Drew Hess" <dhess++at++vision.arc.nasa.gov>
> Message-Id: <9406161250.ZM21841++at++airy.arc.nasa.gov>
> Date: Thu, 16 Jun 1994 12:50:48 -0700
> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.1.0 22feb94 MediaMail)
> To: info-performer++at++sgi.com
> Subject: multiple pfChannels vs. multiple pfPipes
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Mime-Version: 1.0
>
> I want to render several views of the same scene on a 4-processor Onyx/RE2 (one
> RE2 pipeline at this point) in a Performer application.
>
> Is it generally better to configure Performer to use one pfPipe and multiple
> pfChannels, using channel groups to share as much state information as
> possible; or should I use multiple pfPipes and split the number of channels up
> evenly among the pfPipes?

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:50:20 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.