Rockbox mail archive

• Next message: Daniel Stenberg: "Re: Menu exit using OFF button"
• Previous message: Stuart Tedford: "RE: anti-skip buffer question"
• Maybe in reply to: Bryce Benton: "anti-skip buffer question"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Increasing the buffer time means setting the minimum amount of data in the buffer to a higher number. System memory is fixed, so a higher buffer time means the hard drive must spin-up more often to fill the buffer.

A lower buffer reduces battery consumption. A higher buffer reduces possible errors.

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Bryce Benton <me_at_brycebenton.com>
Reply-To: rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:30:29 -0600

can you (or someone) be more specific?

do i understand correctly: longer buffer time means less battery
consumption because the disk doesn't have to spin up as often?

if that's true, my question remains... in what cases would someone want
less than the maximum buffer time?

thanks,
bryce

> > how does the anti-skip buffer affect performance?
> >
> > or... is there any reason to select less than the longest time for
>this
> > setting?
>
>Eats more battery, since it reduces the time between disk reads by the
>buffer amount.
>
>v

• Next message: Daniel Stenberg: "Re: Menu exit using OFF button"
• Previous message: Stuart Tedford: "RE: anti-skip buffer question"
• Maybe in reply to: Bryce Benton: "anti-skip buffer question"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]