On 2 Okt, 22:29, Aaron Hoover <ahoo...@eecs.berkeley.edu> wrote: > My external hardware is actually sending 2000 packets per second right > now (but that can also be changed). Each packet currently contains 6 > bytes of data and 6 bytes of overhead. So, 12 bytes per packet * 2000 > packets per second is 24k bytes per second.
> Maybe I am barking up the wrong tree with Python from a speed > perspective, but it's just some much faster and more fun to write than > anything else... I have processed data in "real time" with Python from a system that delivered data from 64 channels at 48 kHz, 2 bytes per sample, video tracker, I/O ports, etc. Each package was 432 bytes and arrived at 16 kHz, that is 6.59 MiB per second. Python is much faster than you think. You just have to do some buffering. :-) If your hardware does not provide sufficient buffering, I'd write a small C function that takes care of this. This would be a function that collects data as it comes in, writes to a queue, and waits for more. Run this C function from a background Python thread using ctypes.CDLL. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
