Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 11:19:18 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk> Cc: "David P. Caldwell" <inonit@inonit.com>, freebsd-java <freebsd-java@hub.freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Reading and writing audio data at the same time on Linux Message-ID: <15094.55574.718167.919180@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.31.0105041621220.28133-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk> References: <JIEPJODHFFPGJDGMCPBEIENCCDAA.inonit@inonit.com> <Pine.GSO.4.31.0105041621220.28133-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I'm not an expert on the linux JDK, but I ran into this sort of problem a > > few years back. > > > > Could it have to do with different scheduling? > > Actually, according to the java spec (as I've been led to understand it) > there is NO WAY to guarantee round-robin timesliced scheduling in java. Correct. However, there are ways that work on most any 'normal' platform. (However, it may not work on a J2ME platform that uses something like microJava, etc...) > Why? Well, your suggestion above sounds plausible: have a high-priority > thread wake up occasionally and ensure that the right priority thread is > running. But Java says that thread priorities may be mapped onto a > smaller number of priority levels that the ohst OS provides, and says > nothing about how that mapping is performed. The result is that there > seems (to me, at least) to be NO portable way of ensuring that your > MAX_PRIORITY thread is _really_ running at any higher priorituy than any > other thread, so it may never wake up. It may not be portable across *all* JVM's, but it should work on any hardware platform that supports J2SE. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15094.55574.718167.919180>