Danjel van Tijn

I have a program sending commands via OSC to a max/msp patch.

I need to make a decision about how I structure max to work with the software sending OSC but I am not sure if one of the methods is a big "no-no" (e.g. overly processor intensive)

The host program sending OSC commands sends commands out on 30 different ports. Different sections of the max patch listen to the different ports.

The large amount of commands are all sent on one port only but the max patch routes them to the different sections. (e.g. use CNMAT's OSC_Route object)

In option 1 I am not sure if it is a bad idea to use more than one port as this would be the ideal solution for the particular problem I am working on. Any overhead I should be considering?

Option 1:
The host program sending OSC commands sends commands out on 30 different ports. Different sections of the max patch listen to the different ports. 

Option 2:
The large amount of commands are all sent on one port only but the max patch routes them to the different sections. (e.g. use CNMAT's OSC_Route object)

effcient-programming-with-osc-protocol

I think using different ports would increase the chance of error quite 

What I do is simply prepend a number to the OSC-string, and then use 

regular route->send objects, and go from there.

> I have a program sending commands via OSC to a max/msp patch.

> I need to make a decision about how I structure max to work with the software sending OSC but I am not sure if one of the methods is a big "no-no" (e.g. overly processor intensive)

> The host program sending OSC commands sends commands out on 30 different ports. Different sections of the max patch listen to the different ports. 

> The large amount of commands are all sent on one port only but the max patch routes them to the different sections. (e.g. use CNMAT's OSC_Route object)

> In option 1 I am not sure if it is a bad idea to use more than one port as this would be the ideal solution for the particular problem I am working on. Any overhead I should be considering?

I think using different ports would increase the chance of error quite 
dramatically.

What I do is simply prepend a number to the OSC-string, and then use 
regular route->send objects, and go from there.

Danjel van Tijn skrev:
> I have a program sending commands via OSC to a max/msp patch.
>
> I need to make a decision about how I structure max to work with the software sending OSC but I am not sure if one of the methods is a big "no-no" (e.g. overly processor intensive)
>
> Option 1:
> The host program sending OSC commands sends commands out on 30 different ports. Different sections of the max patch listen to the different ports. 
>
> Option 2:
> The large amount of commands are all sent on one port only but the max patch routes them to the different sections. (e.g. use CNMAT's OSC_Route object)
>
>
> In option 1 I am not sure if it is a bad idea to use more than one port as this would be the ideal solution for the particular problem I am working on. Any overhead I should be considering?
>
>
> thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
> .
>
>


So in my case I am using a program called VDMX to send data.

So if I structure each OSC message like this

I can just use the /1/ or /2/ and OSC-Route instead of listening to lot's of different ports.

So if I structure each OSC message like this  

/VDMX/1/command1/ data
/VDMX/2/command2/ data
/VDMX/2/command3/ data

Effcient programming with OSC protocol?