Prev: RF Generated FTL Event Horizon
Next: New Energy Source?
From: Greegor on 14 Jun 2010 23:53
Even if you had two identical make, model
and configuration computers, with Windows
on them CLONED to be identical, and somehow
simultaneously triggered, there would still be
lots of reasons the two machines would
never be synchronized.

Even under Linux I would strongly suspect that
two IDENTICAL computers could never be
perfectly synchronized.

What, you thought that identical computers
with identical software would give you
IDENTICAL results?

LOL

If all this is for is a benchmark testing of
software, then the low tech approach
of using a double T bar to tap both left
click buttons at the same time would
be accurate enough.

Software benchmark testing is NOT down to the nanosecond.

The events timed are not short.

On a one minute process, looking for
triggering within nanoseconds is not necessary.

On a 10 minute process, worrying about
nanoseconds is absurd.

How long is the event being timed?

Is somebody seeking accuracy that is unrealistic?

Has anybody GENUINELY had a reason to
want to fully synchronize two modern PC's?

In the olden days, Tandem computers ran
synchronized computers always cross
checking results for high reliability BANKING
work.

The early space shuttle used to use dual
computers checking each others work.

But the OP Ken Ingram is doing
BENCH TESTING of software, right?

Make a wooden double T bar with bits
of rubber to press the two left mouse buttons.

What other plans did you have?

How exactly are you TIMING this race,
by the way? With an egg timer?

Did you REALLY think you had to run the
two software packages side by side to
do a speed test?

You could run one and watch the start and
end time in tenths of a second on the
system clock, and then do the same for
the other program.

The "other Greg Hanson" in Cedar Rapids, Iowa
From: Archimedes' Lever on 15 Jun 2010 00:06
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 02:13:20 GMT, greghanson(a)prograde.com (Greg Hanson)
wrote:

>On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:46:47 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
><OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:
>
>
>> Simply drop a second audio card into your first PC.
>>
>
>OK, but the commercial audio editing software I use (CoolEdit) only
>generates a stereo signal. If I open a second instance of it, how do I
>force it to address the second soundcard?

Run Linux and one of the many hugely advanced mixing studios that are
saturating the community. Lots of FREEdom there.
>
>There appears to be nothing in the program itself that will enable
>this. IOW if you change the default device in one instance, it changes
>it in all.

Just about any live distro has some sound tools, but there are sound
and composition specific distros out there where you boot it up, and you
have 64 tracks at your disposal. Or whatever.

>Any suggestions?

See above.
From: Archimedes' Lever on 15 Jun 2010 00:08
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:40:22 -0700, "Joel Koltner"
<zapwireDASHgroups(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

>Note that you probably should prefer a single audio card over several if your
>goal is to keep everything in lock-step sync: If you use multiple cards,
>they'll likely each have their own clock generators that will be ever so
>slightly different in frequency and hence the audio output will slowly get out
>of sync unless your software is very much on top of this and can insert or
>delete samples to "fix" it (I'd be surprised if most software had such an
>option...)

Note that switching latencies in such a scenario will be very short
with respect to audio frequencies and events, so it should be fine for
his intents.

Their not really synched 'lock-step-synch' is likely pretty damned
close, like single digit milliseconds.
From: Archimedes' Lever on 15 Jun 2010 00:09
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:40:22 -0700, "Joel Koltner"
<zapwireDASHgroups(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

>Most soundcards these days support 5.1 audio, so perhaps you could just use
>front L+R and rear L+R for your four outputs?

He said Cooledit does stereo.
From: Archimedes' Lever on 15 Jun 2010 00:23
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 20:53:49 -0700 (PDT), Greegor <greegor47(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

>Even under Linux I would strongly suspect that
>two IDENTICAL computers could never be
>perfectly synchronized.

Cluster arrangements have to be.

Where 'perfectly' has a definition.

One you failed to define and eluded to being a number which is not
easily attainable in any system.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: RF Generated FTL Event Horizon
Next: New Energy Source?