jigar-joshi / libjingle

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/libjingle
0 stars 0 forks source link

libjingle speed issue #131

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I trying to use libjingle as data channel between two points.
I can make channel and send data(i use tunnelsessionclient and related 
pseudotcpchannel), but
data change rate is very small - 100kb/s. It isnt ok for me and i have some 
questions about libjingle.

May be my send/receive scheme is very wrong and i should replace it with 
something other?
I use own separate thread (not base_talk::Thread, system thread) and send data 
MSGs trought
talk_base::Thread->send to my class method and run it in talk_base::Thread 
content of thread where i settled up tunnel. In method i use tunnel write/read 
methods. It is ok?

Second, when i receive session request, session manager automatically creating 
session and called
related session_client registered with requested content-info. But it does in 
signalling thread!
It is normal?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by inger...@gmail.com on 28 Jan 2011 at 4:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by jun...@google.com on 29 Jun 2011 at 10:14

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Hi inger...,

I'd like to discuss with you about tunnel session for data transfer. Could you 
plz have a look at my problems?
https://code.google.com/p/libjingle/issues/detail?id=214&can=5

Thanks

Original comment by wangqin...@gmail.com on 1 Nov 2011 at 5:06

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Speed issue was solved by increasing data buffer size to 100kb.

Original comment by inger...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2011 at 12:13

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Thanks. Is that increasing recv buf size or send buf size or both of them to 
100kb? I found the recv buf size is 60k, and send buf size is 90k in Pseudotcp 
code. 

Original comment by wangqin...@gmail.com on 3 Nov 2011 at 2:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
PseudoTcp buffer sizes are now configurable.

Original comment by juberti@google.com on 8 Dec 2011 at 9:33