<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED NOTABUG - Pulse audio NOT USED multithreading" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90210#c31">Comment # 31</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED NOTABUG - Pulse audio NOT USED multithreading" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90210">bug 90210</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:alessandro.ferri@icloud.com" title="Alessandro Ferri <alessandro.ferri@icloud.com>"> Alessandro Ferri</a> <pre>(In reply to Mike Brady from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=90210#c28">comment #28</a>) > (In reply to Alessandro Ferri from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=90210#c27">comment #27</a>) > > > Thanks for these. No promises, at least for a couple of weeks... > > > > Thanks again. I wait with impatience. If I can help you in some way, just > > say the word. > > Hi again. I spent a little time on this yesterday. It turns out that the > pulseaudio back end uses the 'simple' pulseaudio interface. The problem with > it is that the latency information it returns in the simple interface is > very inaccurate. Shairport Sync monitors the latency every time it adds a > packet of audio frame – i.e. about every 8 ms. Unfortunately, it seems that > the latency information is completely unreliable at this level of > interaction. > > So, getting a good quality pulseaudio system will essentially require a > complete rewrite of the backend to avoid using the 'simple' interface. It > might take some time ;) Hi again Mike, I saw that came out of the Relise 2.3.x and that you are editing many aspects of shairport sync. There is hope that you review latency and sync with pulseaudio? I also need to ask for clarification on file shairport-sync.conf. Where can I send the request?</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>