On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 15:52 -0500, Jeremy White wrote: > > <snip> > > I'm very encouraged to hear this as we are very, very interested in > > SPICE as a WAN protocol. We have noticed that the end user experience > > is almost as dependent upon latency as bandwidth so I was a little > > concerned that you are sending pixmaps changes on a periodic basis. > > Does that introduce any noticeable latency? > > > > I've been quite surprised at how much users are affected by latency I > > would not have thought an issue. Thus, I would define noticeable as > > somewhere between 50 and 100 ms. Thanks very much - John > > > > Actually, there is a hard coded behavior in the Spice server that can > make it function poorly with any kind of latency. That is, by default, > it requires that the client supply an acknowledgment either every 20th > or 40th packet. So if you do something that generates more than 40 > display messages in a short period of time (which isn't that hard to do) > you have to wait for a full round trip before proceeding on. > > The attached patch hacks its way around that issue by mangling the sizes > up by a factor of 10. I have a todo on my list to ask smarter people > here how better to address this issue. > > Cheers, > > Jeremy > Interesting. That could explain some of the latency issues we uncovered in our testing which convinced us to stay with NX and RDP for now rather than moving to SPICE. Thanks - John _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel