Todd Denniston wrote: > Frank Cox wrote, On 10/20/2008 10:50 PM: >> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:10:57 -0500 >> Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> I didn't find anything helpful with a quick Google search for "flash 10 >>> multitheaded" but maybe it is an issue with multi-core machines? >> >> That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this >> dual-core >> machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine >> that's >> sitting beside it. Both running F8. >> > > > have you considered/ever tried forcing flash &| the browser &| X > processes to operate only on one processor (core) with taskset, just > to see if it may be a context switching/processor cache bashing problem? > > > I have noticed on the dual Xeon 1.50GHz W/512MB I use, that if I lock > X to the second processor, when visiting animated sites like > http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?animate=true > The whole system is smother and the animation is less glitchy. > [with out locking X pulls ~85%cpu (of combined cpus), > with locking X pulls ~10-50%cpu (of combined cpus), on that page > after it self reloads.] > Other than in the "Advertisement" area I don't see any other "flash" on http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?animate=true . When you were talking about "less glitchy" were you talking about the radar animation or some other aspect of that page? The radar animation is part of javascript. -- An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
