SAC-PSG-CIGI Archives

December 2016

SAC-PSG-CIGI@DISCUSSIONS.SISOSTDS.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date:
Thu, 22 Dec 2016 05:01:24 -0500
Reply-To:
SAC-PSG-CIGI <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Message-ID:
Sender:
SAC-PSG-CIGI <[log in to unmask]>
From:
Roland Humphries <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (13 lines)
Hi Amir, I am already doing that (based on receive time of first message packet), IG side data age is not the problem, its the age of the data from the host that the IG cannot determine. I could assume a fixed offset on the IG (by approximating the host time over a number of frames) but that would be different between IG's. The test case I've been using as a stress test is to:
- calculate position / velocity for entity on host using time T
- random sleep up to 250ms
- send data at time T+sleep time
In this case the random sleep time is unknowable by the IG so the results are very erratic, unless using my additional data age that I add immediately before sending.

This all boils down to how to accurately calculate the simulation time on the IG so that if the host and IG calculated simulation time at exactly the same moment they would return the same result (without an accurate synchronised clock based on NTP / PTP).

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the SAC-PSG-CIGI list, click the following link:
https://discussions.sisostds.org/index.htm?SUBED1=SAC-PSG-CIGI&A=1

ATOM RSS1 RSS2