0 means an infinite queue. On Jan 6, 2011 8:37 AM, "Cedric Pradalier" wrote: > Hello Josh, > > While trying to reproduce the delay build-up, I checked that the > behaviour you described is the one I observe, as long as my message > queue is positive. > > However, I could reproduce the behaviour when the message queue is zero: > ros::Subscriber sub = n.subscribe("chatter", 0, chatterCallback); > > What is the intended behaviour in this case? I might have thought that > zero would disable the queue when I wrote the code earlier... > I guess the subscribe functions should document the semantic or flag > an error if the value is invalid. > > Find my test programs attached. I'm postponing filing a ticket until I > understand if there is a mistake somewhere else than in my code :) > > Best. > > On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Josh Faust wrote: >>> In this case, I was getting message build-up even with when the >>> subscriber used a queue size of one. It seems that the teleop message >>> where small enough to accumulate in the TCP kernel or HW buffer and >>> not being discarded while the callback was running. This can be easily >>> identified by looking at the message timestamp. In our case, the >>> message age was increasing (obviously, you can only evaluate that on >>> machines with synchronised clocks). >> >> If you have a way to reproduce this, please file a ticket -- roscpp should >> be draining the sockets as quickly as possible whether or not your callbacks >> take a long time. They should be totally decoupled. >> Josh >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ros-users mailing list >> ros-users@code.ros.org >> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users >> >> > > > > -- > Cedric Pradalier