On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Brett L. Trotter <br...@webtrotter.com>wrote:
> I have a loop block that I wanted to run very slow (1Hz), and put a > throttle block set to rate 1. Unfortunately, it seems to tear through > the first 8-9k samples in a blink before it slows down. Is there an > alternative implementation of the throttle block that would work at very > slow speeds? Perhaps rather than memcopying the entire batch of samples > passed into the work function, it would loop copy and deal with rate and > sleeps during the loop? Obviously this wouldn't be optimal for fast rate > blocks, but what about creating a separate throttle optimized for slow > data rates? > Yes, I think you could make something like that work, but you're right that it would have to be done for only small data rates. If you come up with a general solution to this, we can work on getting it into the code. This comes back to the general issues others have had with the fact that the schedule optimizes for throughput and doesn't really care about issues like what you are seeing. It pops up more in the case where people want to minimize latency. Tom
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
