[osg-users] About Interleaved Array Support

Julien Valentin julienvalentin51 at gmail.com
Wed Oct 10 08:35:16 PDT 2018

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.

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:

More information about the osg-users mailing list