Shawn Wilton wrote:

>>> In that case, using circular buffers, you could in theory achieve around
>>> 50M events
>>
>> Not sure how you get 50M, but I'm getting 100M (see an earlier message).
> 
> Using a circular buffer, not your method.  I like your method for ultimate
> capacity, but a circular buffer is much easier to implement.  :-)

Still not sure how you get 50M. If I understand your idea of a circular
buffer correctly, you use a buffer of 511 2-byte counters (counting to
2^16) with a 2-byte index field. This counts 33M4 events (511 * 2^16). Or
you use a buffer of 340 3-byte counters (counting to 100k) with a 2-byte
index field. This counts 34M events (340 * 100k).

So what am I missing here? How's your buffer structured?

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist