3 ms·
> If your path is sensitive to 200us of latency you should probably optimize your application and tune your GC. okay, you've done this, three years later and i
by jcelerier 5y ago
> If your path is sensitive to 200us of latency you should probably optimize your application and tune your GC.
okay, you've done this, three years later and it's the same thing again since you need to accomodate the new features. your users haven't upgraded their computers. what do you do ?
- pjmlp 5y agoRun a profiler and optimize again.
- jcelerier 5y agoYour original code is already optimized as much as is possible outside of the things mentioned by OP
- pjmlp 5y agoDon't guess, measure. Then just like C, writing a tiny set of functions in Assembly is always an option.
- jcelerier 5y agoKeep in mind that I am referring to this: > If your path is sensitive to 200us of latency you should probably optimize your application and tune your GC. > Don't guess, measure. yes, I am saying that the original code has already gone through a complete optimization process, everything is written in written in assembly, and you are at 970us on your 1ms time budget. (I'm not pulling those out of thin air, I was literally at a client yesterday with some real-time code with a 1ms deadline on a desktop OS and we have to cram as much things as possible in that millisecond)
- pjmlp 5y agoWell in that case there is no way around upgrading the hardware, a 486 won't play a MP4 no matter how hand tuned the Assembly code is.