message priority questions

    Mar 03 2006 | 10:11 pm
    concerning the different priority levels of message computing I can't get clear with the infos found in the max-documentation:
    as far as I understand there are basically 3 priority levels: high priroity (or schedular-mode), normal and low priority (or queue).
    question 1: is there a difference between high and normal priority when max is not in overdrive mode? or the same question differently: is there any "high priority" if max is not in overdrive mode?
    question 2: it looks like there are 2 ways of adding tasks to the queue when using "jit.qball": either replacing the old task (usurp-mode) or adding it (deferlow).
    is there a way of replacing a task in the queue (like "jit.qball" in usurp-mode does) without using jitter?
    any advice is highly appreciated.
    best noid

    • Mar 04 2006 | 1:41 am
      For your first question you should check out jkc's very informative article on this topic:
      For your second question:
      You might try looking at [qlim 0]. According to the manual it will hold a message for a specified minimum amount of time, and will allow that message to be overwritten if it receives another before that amount of time has passed. To me, this sounds similar to what [jit.qball] does in usurp mode, but I'm not completely certain of this. Does anybody out there know for sure?
    • Mar 04 2006 | 8:25 am
      A somewhat related question about priorities when recalling presets from pattrstorage:
      In my patch I lam loading configurations of subpatchers determined by presets recalled from pattrstorage in the main patcher. There is the priorities message to pattrstorage to set the desired order of the loading sequence. So far so good.
      It would be very useful to control this process in more detail e.g. make sure a subpatcher has been recalled/loaded successfully and then continue in the sequence. Is there a way to set execution timing within a preset recall sequence from pattrstorage other then set the order of parameters being recalled?
      Any insights welcome.
      thanks B.