feat: Sorted queue for voice chat frames #1363
Conversation
…onality still required
We should probably replace ring buffer with something that orders frames
Also reverted frame size change because it would make the lasts frames to be incomplete. We need to send various frames in the same packet, if we want to improve protocol efficiency. Or we could try to implement a way to ensure that incomplete frames are completed with silences when recording is stopped so we can send them. Or round or recording side to frames.
|
This branch can be previewed at https://explorer.decentraland.zone/branch/feat/ordered-buffer-for-voice-chat/index.html |
pablitar
changed the title
|
|
||
| const maxCountToRead = this.writePointer - this.readPointer | ||
|
|
||
| const count = readCount ? Math.min(readCount, maxCountToRead) : maxCountToRead |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| const count = readCount ? Math.min(readCount, maxCountToRead) : maxCountToRead | |
| const count = Math.min(readCount ?? Infinity, maxCountToRead) |
| import { expect } from 'chai' | ||
|
|
||
| describe('RingBuffer', () => { | ||
| let buffer: RingBuffer<Float32Array> | ||
| describe('OrderedRingBuffer', () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should you maybe change the name of the file as well?
| @@ -112,7 +113,7 @@ function processEncodeMessage(e: MessageEvent) { | |||
| const sampleRate = getSampleRate(e) | |||
| const encoderWorklet = (encoderWorklets[e.data.streamId] = encoderWorklets[e.data.streamId] || { | |||
| working: false, | |||
| encoder: new libopus.Encoder(1, sampleRate, 24000, 20, true), | |||
| encoder: new libopus.Encoder(1, sampleRate, OPUS_BITS_PER_SECOND, OPUS_FRAME_SIZE_MS, true), | |||
|
|
||
| private resolveBlockedDequeueWith(amount: number) { | ||
| const items = amount === 0 ? [] : this.dequeueItems(amount) | ||
| this.pendingDequeue?.futures.forEach((it) => it.resolve(items)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be:
this.pendingDequeue?.futures?.forEach((it) => it.resolve(items))
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I recall correctly, I think that if pendingDequeue is not undefined then we know that futures is not undefined.
And I think the syntax here works in that sense: If pendingDequeue is undefined, all that follows won't execute. I think. I'll check just in case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This code gets translated to (_a = this.pendingDequeue) === null || _a === void 0 ? void 0 : _a.futures.forEach((it) => it.resolve(items));
I think _a.futures.forEach((it) => it.resolve(items)); will only execute if (_a = this.pendingDequeue) === null || _a === void 0 is false. This is quite cryptic, but I think it works as we want :)
| this.pendingDequeue.futures.push(newFuture) | ||
|
|
||
| setTimeout(() => { | ||
| if (this.pendingDequeue && this.pendingDequeue.futures.indexOf(newFuture) >= 0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| if (this.pendingDequeue && this.pendingDequeue.futures.indexOf(newFuture) >= 0) { | |
| if (this.pendingDequeue && this.pendingDequeue.futures.includes(newFuture)) { |
|
|
||
| if (this.queuedCount() >= count) { | ||
| const items = this.dequeueItems(count) | ||
| this.pendingDequeue?.futures.forEach((it) => it.resolve(items)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be:
this.pendingDequeue?.futures?.forEach((it) => it.resolve(items))
?
…traland/explorer into feat/ordered-buffer-for-voice-chat
This PR adds a sorted queue for voice chat frames received from the network. This allows to potentially receive the voice packets in different order, and that should improve voice chat when there is a big P2P network.