Re: Determining if it is "safe" to send UDP packets
From: Scott McPhillips [MVP] (org-dot-mvps-at-scottmcp)
Date: 01/30/05
- Next message: Alexander Grigoriev: "Re: launch of a kernel mode driver from network directory is impossible?"
- Previous message: Pavel A.: "Re: Lowering CPU usage of a process"
- In reply to: Spiro Trikaliotis: "Re: Determining if it is "safe" to send UDP packets"
- Next in thread: Zoltan Csizmadia: "Re: Determining if it is "safe" to send UDP packets"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:29:30 -0500
Spiro Trikaliotis wrote:
>>I could be glib and say the answer is TCP but I assume you have good
>>reasons for using UDP.
>
>
> Yes, we have. We want to transfer images obtained from a camera as fast
> as possible over a wireless link. The protocol used is tolerant of
> packet losses, thus, it is not a big problem if the one or the other
> packet does not get received.
>
> Every image is packed. Unfortunately, the packed images appear almost
> all at the same time. That's the reason why we have to send them out in
> bursts.
I don't know if it will help in your UDP case, but if you have not
experimented with various buffer sizes using SO_SNDBUF it might be worth
an investigation.
But the burst nature of the data source just about guarantees that you
will create buffer overflows if you send as fast as possible. I think
you are going to have to limit the data rate yourself by introducing
delays between packets. That delay could be based on experimentation
or, as suggested, an automated training sequence.
-- Scott McPhillips [VC++ MVP]
- Next message: Alexander Grigoriev: "Re: launch of a kernel mode driver from network directory is impossible?"
- Previous message: Pavel A.: "Re: Lowering CPU usage of a process"
- In reply to: Spiro Trikaliotis: "Re: Determining if it is "safe" to send UDP packets"
- Next in thread: Zoltan Csizmadia: "Re: Determining if it is "safe" to send UDP packets"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
