[osg-users] About Interleaved Array Support

[Julien Valentin]

Hi Robert
I understand... it would be wiser for compatibitlity  with codebase not to integrate it in core osg.
As there's no interaction with core osg I'll keep it in an external nodekit.
Cheers


robertosfield wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 12:40, Julien Valentin
> <> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > AFAIK Memory alignement compliance yields in better performances...No?
> > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/18853713/does-interleaving-in-vbos-speed-up-performance-when-using-vaos
> > 
> 
> On some GPU architectures it might do, others it will be little or no
> difference.
> 
> One must always benchmark with proper scenes and across a range of
> platforms to know whether it's worthwhile.
> 
> When judging the balance of cost vs benefit you have to consider the
> whole usage chain - how do you get data in and out, how do you process
> it.  With an InterleavedGeometry implementation you are limited to
> just applications that explicitly create and can process
> InterleavedGeometry.
> 
> With features like this you also need to consider the support burden,
> but maintaining it and helping users learn how to use it properly and
> what happens when it's not compatible with the existing functionality
> that assumes osg::Geometry.
> 
> For the OSG I'm focused on maintainability and streamlining support,
> not inviting lots of new features and support associated with it.  For
> bleeding edge features I'm focused on the VSG - here we have greater
> freedom of introducing new ways of doing things as there isn't
> compatibility and big code base and community to worry about.
> 
> Robert.
> _______________________________________________
> osg-users mailing list
> 
> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
> 
>  ------------------
> Post generated by Mail2Forum


------------------------
Twirling twirling twirling toward freedom

------------------
Read this topic online here:
http://forum.openscenegraph.org/viewtopic.php?p=75065#75065