Lord Crc wrote:B.Y.O.B., I agree that having control over sampling density would be nice, it's something else than what this thread is all about though.
This is about how sample contributions are added to the film.
B.Y.O.B. wrote:Ok. To me as an un-experienced person in this stuff it seemed that there maybe could have been a relationship
Lord Crc wrote:Hm, sounds expensive in terms of locking. I'll give it a try and compare with my current scheme.
Lord Crc wrote:Sadly I didn't get a 24 core machine for xmas, so it's hard to test the different schemes scale under real pressure.
jeanphi wrote:Well, it shouldn't make a difference if you do the locking outside the loops, ie loop over each impacted tile, lock the tile, loop over each impacted pixel of the tile, splat, unlock the tile and move to the next one.
Lord Crc wrote:Anyway your initial post made me think we could perhaps do some lightweight spinlock-like locking per tile for each AddSample. Would be like a hybrid between full-blown tile locking and atomic adds. Could be interesting to try.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest