[Flac] Re: Welcome to the "Flac" mailing list

[Brian Willoughby]

You're brilliant, Harry.  Lame MT running on 2 threads runs at 120%  
while Lame (standard) running on 2 processes runs at 200%.  If you  
still prefer only 120% over 200%, then you can continue to believe  
that multithreading this kind of algorithm is "smart" - I guess you  
weren't paying attention when folks on this mailing list suggested  
that you are far better off running FLAC multiple times on a  
multiprocessor machine compared to any small speedup you might get  
from multithreading.

Brian


On Nov 2, 2007, at 06:23, Harry Sack wrote:

2007/11/2, Brian Willoughby <brianw at sounds.wa.com>:
I worked for Microsoft for 4 years, and have been programming audio
software for 25 years (starting many years before WAV or RIFF was
invented).

haha, that explains why you give such stupid answers like 'making the  
encoder support multiple threads won't speed it up' while other  
encoders (like LAME MT) have nice speed boosts when doing this ...

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac/attachments/20071102/5e91dc87/attachment.htm