Kas Ob.

Hi, VMT is not a problem here, VMT for such interfaces are different beast from VMT for objects/classes, VMT tables with COM interfaces (interfaces with GUID which i like to call "named interfaces" or "IDed interfaces") are separated into their own tables identified by their GUID, even for one object/interface, so VMT will be alright no matter what inheritance is there, also VMT for each interface are agnostic for other GUID declaration. As for the interfaces you listed IInterface and IUnknown, this might be a problem as they declared with the same GUID (TGUID) hence they will compete to replace one another, they are identical in structure but different in parameters (declaration), so they will work unless the compiler will complain about stuff like Integer vs Cardinal or TGUID vs PGUID..., the problem here is how compiler see them and when. I might be wrong here, but the fix should be removing Windows.Foundation.IUnknown , in other words, the already known interfaces should not be redeclared/generated.

Also i can't help here, but have question; Are these repositories referring to the same QuickJS ? https://github.com/mengmo/QuickJS-Windows-Build https://github.com/Coldzer0/QuickJS-Pascal

No sure i do understand that, but lets say on single core the test will yield similar result to the article, meaning Sleep(0) is magnitude slower than Sleep(1) and SwitchToThread, then that OS should not be working at all ! and if worked then it will be slower than computer in 70s and 80s, i mean less than 10Mhz CPU.

Spent two hours trying to reproduce anything close to that mentioned article https://joeduffyblog.com/2006/08/22/priorityinduced-starvation-why-sleep1-is-better-than-sleep0-and-the-windows-balance-set-manager/ I read that article years ago, many years, yet i couldn't reproduce anything even small hint if that is the case with Sleep(0) vs Sleep(1) vs SwitchToThread, So i just wrote two tests, one is mimicking the starvation pointed and presented in the article producer/consumer, and the other just how efficient these three method. Also to be clear, i am not saying the article is misleading or wrong, but it is most likely testing different thing completely (namely the efficiency of ThreadPool in C# in 2006), or the test is happening is single core CPU belongs to past and gone era, know this Sleep(1) by definition can't perform less than OS timer granularity which is by default 1000/64 seconds almost 15-16 ms, and in best case scenario it will be 1 ms, this is guaranteed by the OS, so the article result is irrelevant today. First test program ThreadIterationTest; {$APPTYPE CONSOLE} uses System.SysUtils, System.Classes, Winapi.Windows; {$WARN SYMBOL_PLATFORM OFF} type TSwitchMethod = (smSleep0, smSleep1, smSwitchToThread); TCounterThread = class(TThread) private FSwitchMethod: TSwitchMethod; FIterationCount: Int64; FDuration: Integer; procedure Execute; override; public constructor Create(SwitchMethod: TSwitchMethod; Duration: Integer; Priority: TThreadPriority); property IterationCount: Int64 read FIterationCount; property SwitchMethod: TSwitchMethod read FSwitchMethod; end; constructor TCounterThread.Create(SwitchMethod: TSwitchMethod; Duration: Integer; Priority: TThreadPriority); begin inherited Create(True); // Create suspended FSwitchMethod := SwitchMethod; FDuration := Duration; FIterationCount := 0; Self.Priority := Priority; FreeOnTerminate := True; end; procedure TCounterThread.Execute; var StartTick, Duration: Cardinal; begin Duration := FDuration * 1000; StartTick := GetTickCount; while (GetTickCount - StartTick) < Duration do begin Inc(FIterationCount); case FSwitchMethod of {(*} smSleep0: Sleep(0); smSleep1: Sleep(1); smSwitchToThread: SwitchToThread; {*)} end; end; end; function ThPriorityToString(ThProirity: TThreadPriority): string; var P: Integer; begin case ThProirity of {(*} tpIdle: Result:= 'Idle'; tpLowest: Result:= 'Lowest'; tpLower: Result:= 'Lower'; tpNormal: Result:= 'Normal'; tpHigher: Result:= 'Higher'; tpHighest: Result:= 'Highest'; tpTimeCritical: Result:= 'TimeCritical'; {*)} else Result := 'Unknown'; end; Result := Result + '('; case ThProirity of {(*} tpIdle: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_IDLE; tpLowest: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_LOWEST; tpLower: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_BELOW_NORMAL; tpNormal: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL; tpHigher: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_ABOVE_NORMAL; tpHighest: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_HIGHEST; tpTimeCritical: P:= THREAD_PRIORITY_TIME_CRITICAL; {*)} else P := 999; end; Result := Result + IntToStr(P) + ')'; end; procedure RunTest(Duration: Integer; Priority1, Priority2, Priority3: TThreadPriority); var Thread1, Thread2, Thread3: TCounterThread; begin Writeln('Starting test with duration: ', Duration, ' seconds'); Writeln('Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=', ThPriorityToString(Priority1), ', Sleep(1)=', ThPriorityToString(Priority2), ', SwitchToThread=', ThPriorityToString(Priority3)); Thread1 := TCounterThread.Create(smSleep0, Duration, Priority1); Thread2 := TCounterThread.Create(smSleep1, Duration, Priority2); Thread3 := TCounterThread.Create(smSwitchToThread, Duration, Priority3); Thread1.Start; Thread2.Start; Thread3.Start; WaitForSingleObject(Thread1.Handle, INFINITE); WaitForSingleObject(Thread2.Handle, INFINITE); WaitForSingleObject(Thread3.Handle, INFINITE); Writeln('Results:'); Writeln('Sleep(0) iterations: ', Thread1.IterationCount); Writeln('Sleep(1) iterations: ', Thread2.IterationCount); Writeln('SwitchToThread iterations: ', Thread3.IterationCount); Writeln; end; begin try Writeln('Test 1: All threads with normal priority'); RunTest(3, tpNormal, tpNormal, tpNormal); Writeln('Test 1.1: All threads with normal priority'); RunTest(1, tpNormal, tpNormal, tpNormal); Writeln('Test 1.5: All threads with normal priority'); RunTest(5, tpNormal, tpNormal, tpNormal); Writeln('Test 2: Different priorities'); RunTest(5, tpHigher, tpNormal, tpLower); Writeln('Test 3: Different priorities'); RunTest(5, tpLowest, tpHighest, tpNormal); Writeln('Test 4: Different priorities'); RunTest(5, tpLowest, tpLowest, tpLowest); Writeln('Done.'); Readln; except on E: Exception do Writeln(E.ClassName, ': ', E.Message); end; end. Its result on my device Test 1: All threads with normal priority Starting test with duration: 3 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Normal(0), Sleep(1)=Normal(0), SwitchToThread=Normal(0) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 15700875 Sleep(1) iterations: 175 SwitchToThread iterations: 19869985 Test 1.1: All threads with normal priority Starting test with duration: 1 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Normal(0), Sleep(1)=Normal(0), SwitchToThread=Normal(0) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 5266693 Sleep(1) iterations: 60 SwitchToThread iterations: 6658333 Test 1.5: All threads with normal priority Starting test with duration: 5 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Normal(0), Sleep(1)=Normal(0), SwitchToThread=Normal(0) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 26351894 Sleep(1) iterations: 269 SwitchToThread iterations: 33344803 Test 2: Different priorities Starting test with duration: 5 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Higher(1), Sleep(1)=Normal(0), SwitchToThread=Lower(-1) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 26332342 Sleep(1) iterations: 299 SwitchToThread iterations: 33324362 Test 3: Different priorities Starting test with duration: 5 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Lowest(-2), Sleep(1)=Highest(2), SwitchToThread=Normal(0) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 26220753 Sleep(1) iterations: 299 SwitchToThread iterations: 33216074 Test 4: Different priorities Starting test with duration: 5 seconds Thread priorities: Sleep(0)=Lowest(-2), Sleep(1)=Lowest(-2), SwitchToThread=Lowest(-2) Results: Sleep(0) iterations: 26350390 Sleep(1) iterations: 291 SwitchToThread iterations: 33374685 Done. Sleep(1) is in the expected range of 60-64 per second Now different test to emulate the article example, not using Delphi RTL thread pool and anonymous thread, because i never trust them on my XE8. program ThreadStarvationTest; {$APPTYPE CONSOLE} uses System.SysUtils, System.Classes, Winapi.Windows; {$WARN SYMBOL_PLATFORM OFF} type TYieldMethod = (ymSleep0, ymSleep1, ymSwitchToThread); TStarvationThread = class(TThread) private FYieldMethod: TYieldMethod; FIsProducer: Boolean; FDuration: Cardinal; procedure Execute; override; public constructor Create(YieldMethod: TYieldMethod; IsProducer: Boolean; Priority: TThreadPriority); property Duration: Cardinal read FDuration; end; var x: Integer = 0; constructor TStarvationThread.Create(YieldMethod: TYieldMethod; IsProducer: Boolean; Priority: TThreadPriority); begin inherited Create(True); FYieldMethod := YieldMethod; FIsProducer := IsProducer; Self.Priority := Priority; //FreeOnTerminate := True; // don't care, irrelevant FDuration := 0; end; procedure TStarvationThread.Execute; var StartTick: Cardinal; begin // run threads on one core, core 0 SetThreadAffinityMask(GetCurrentThread, 1); if FIsProducer then begin //Sleep(50); // Sleep(500); // Sleep(1500); x := 1; // Producer sets x end else begin StartTick := GetTickCount; while x = 0 do begin case FYieldMethod of ymSleep0: Sleep(0); ymSleep1: Sleep(1); ymSwitchToThread: SwitchToThread; end; end; FDuration := GetTickCount - StartTick; end; end; function ThPriorityToString(ThPriority: TThreadPriority): string; var P: Integer; begin case ThPriority of {(*} tpIdle: Result := 'Idle'; tpLowest: Result := 'Lowest'; tpLower: Result := 'Lower'; tpNormal: Result := 'Normal'; tpHigher: Result := 'Higher'; tpHighest: Result := 'Highest'; tpTimeCritical: Result := 'TimeCritical'; {*)} else Result := 'Unknown'; end; Result := Result + '('; case ThPriority of {(*} tpIdle: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_IDLE; tpLowest: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_LOWEST; tpLower: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_BELOW_NORMAL; tpNormal: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL; tpHigher: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_ABOVE_NORMAL; tpHighest: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_HIGHEST; tpTimeCritical: P := THREAD_PRIORITY_TIME_CRITICAL; {*)} else P := 999; end; Result := Result + IntToStr(P) + ')'; end; function YieldMethodToStr(YieldMethod:TYieldMethod):string; begin case YieldMethod of {(*} ymSleep0: Result := 'Sleep(0)'; ymSleep1: Result := 'Sleep(1)'; ymSwitchToThread: Result := 'SwitchToThread'; {*)} end; end; procedure RunStarvationTest(YieldMethod: TYieldMethod; ConsumerPriority, ProducerPriority: TThreadPriority); var Consumer, Producer: TStarvationThread; begin Writeln('Starting starvation test with ', YieldMethodToStr(YieldMethod), ', Consumer=', ThPriorityToString(ConsumerPriority), ', Producer=', ThPriorityToString(ProducerPriority)); x := 0; Consumer := TStarvationThread.Create(YieldMethod, False, ConsumerPriority); Producer := TStarvationThread.Create(YieldMethod, True, ProducerPriority); Consumer.Start; Producer.Start; Consumer.WaitFor; Producer.WaitFor; Writeln('Result: ', YieldMethodToStr(YieldMethod), ' time: ', Consumer.Duration, ' ms'); Writeln; end; begin try // Test Sleep(0) with equal priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep0, tpNormal, tpNormal); // Test Sleep(0) with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep0, tpNormal, tpLower); // Test Sleep(0) with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep0, tpLower, tpNormal); // Test Sleep(1) with equal priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep1, tpNormal, tpNormal); // Test Sleep(1) with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep1, tpNormal, tpLower); // Test Sleep(1) with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSleep1, tpLower, tpNormal); // Test SwitchToThread with equal priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSwitchToThread, tpNormal, tpNormal); // Test SwitchToThread with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSwitchToThread, tpNormal, tpLower); // Test SwitchToThread with different priorities RunStarvationTest(ymSwitchToThread, tpLower, tpNormal); Writeln('Done.'); Readln; except on E: Exception do Writeln(E.ClassName, ': ', E.Message); end; end. Its result with and without delaying the producer by uncommenting the Sleep(50).. no starvation observed at all and the result is consistent with the delay introduced being Sleep(50), Sleep(500) or Sleep(1500) Starting starvation test with Sleep(0), Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Normal(0) Result: Sleep(0) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(0), Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Lower(-1) Result: Sleep(0) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(0), Consumer=Lower(-1), Producer=Normal(0) Result: Sleep(0) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(1), Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Normal(0) Result: Sleep(1) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(1), Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Lower(-1) Result: Sleep(1) time: 15 ms Starting starvation test with Sleep(1), Consumer=Lower(-1), Producer=Normal(0) Result: Sleep(1) time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with SwitchToThread, Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Normal(0) Result: SwitchToThread time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with SwitchToThread, Consumer=Normal(0), Producer=Lower(-1) Result: SwitchToThread time: 0 ms Starting starvation test with SwitchToThread, Consumer=Lower(-1), Producer=Normal(0) Result: SwitchToThread time: 0 ms Done. True, there is no silver bullet, but Sleep(1) is better for completely different reason and it is impossible to be less than 1ms delay, unless with my vivid imagination your PC has no other threads running, like the OS has nothing else to do, so it will be faced with either 1) put the CPU/core to sleep, i mean really sleep signal and reduce the power for the core. 2) ignore the delay continue, even in this case, the article result can't be reproduce because we have two threads not one, hence the producer will execute releasing the consumer. ps: these tests are for specific measurement, and i know they are not very helpful in real life, but they are accurate in the delays and shows how SwitchToThread is faster then Sleep(0), due the reduced context switch with threads from different processes, as for mixing the priorities, well this is way different subject and longer, but even so as tests shows it is irrelevant with Windows 10 and modern CPU, my CPU is Sandy Bridge so around 15 years old. I would love to see result form modern and different CPUs, just for general information, also from different Windows versions, that would be nice, the discussion of how much relevant the test in real life doesn't concern me, as i am trying to replicate that article strange result.

Sure, if Task Manager is causing freeze then 1) the system is broken and faulty and missing components, 2) it could be that or your devices is infected with malicious software, or 3) have you installed 17 Antivirus ? then uninstalled some or all of them ? this symptoms could be coming from rouge left over filter drivers, Fix your Windows, Delphi and Embarcadero (in this case) has nothing to do with your problem.

Dear Angus try the RAW approach for fun, and see how those can be f*** brutal.

Right, but doesn't really cost your server that much resource ? To put it in different way, without too much explanation of the last one i point to in (D) , see, raw packets are always useless with TCP as any switch/router will drop them as they don't belong to any steam, namely established TCP stream, but and here big bug the connection is there and established, the stream is legit, and your packet will reach its destination, can cause resource depletion on their part as you closed ( terminate abruptly) the connection after sending that packet or similar ones, even you keep yours open and repeat this behavior it becomes more like contest of whos bone is tougher, your server with usual resources, their part with havoc and unpredictable behavior to manage.

You lost me here. What 10m, and what's gps? Honestly i lost my self reading that, fps not gps, (stupid auto correct and clumsy fingers), and 10m=10000000 vs 1m =1000000, as dominator for the rate at setup.

@Angus Robertson I know a few tricks, funny ones and one might say genius while laughing at them, used some and still using in production, but they are not for public or posting in a forum, so i am writing in private to you, you can do them as they are very simple, they are just like step back a little and look at the big picture.

In 10 tests i did, it is synced and difference is at the beginning is 4 ms and in the middle 4ms and at the end still 4ms, that is very accurate considering the acceptable desyncing between audio and video is constrained and small; https://video.stackexchange.com/questions/25064/by-how-much-can-video-and-audio-be-out-of-sync What is still perplexing me is; 1) why the frames are grouped, so i added something like this "OutputDebugString(PChar('Audio: '+IntToStr(AudioSampleDuration)));" before SafeRelease, same for video, the debug output is clearly showing an interleaved frames one by one ! beautiful interleaving, yet the result video frames are grouped, so it might be something has to do with WMF and its codec or missing some some settings somewhere, in other words you code is doing it right. 2) the duration at 1000 and i am not talking about the timestamp but the relevancy of nominator and video frames is 1000, i tried to tweak things and it didn't change, even used the recommended 10m instead of 1m you are using, still didn't change, so this also might be like above a setting or a constrained bit/frame/packet limitation specific to this very codec, one test video is 60gps with 200 duration, the output is 1000 at 30fps, while it should be 400. Yes in some way, see if there is gap then the audio is distorted and the final video is bad or low quality, so yes decoding the audio into PCM from some exotic audio format, then use more standard audio codec from WMF will be the best thing to keep the quality. Anyway, here a nice answer on SO leading to very beautiful SDK, you might find it very useful https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41326231/network-media-sink-in-microsoft-media-foundation https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/1017223/CaptureManager-SDK-Capturing-Recording-and-Streami#twentythirddemoprogram Now, why i keep looking at this drifting in audio and video you might ask, the answer is long time ago i wanted to know how those media players could read from slow HDD huge chunks of data and decode them then render them, everything is irrelevant here except one behavior you can watch, they like WMP and VLC do strange thing, they read the header of the video, then load huge buffers form the beginning then seek to the end of that file then again load huge chunk, from the end they try to see how much the streams drifted, only after that they play, those players saw it all, so they do tricks of resyncing at there own, when the video/audio stream are desynced and it is possible then adjust and cover it (fix it) Why is this is relevant here if all modern and used players doing this and fix things, because this will fail when you stream that video there is no way to seek to the end, so the player will play what he get, being WebRTC, RTMP, RTSP... Think video conference or WebCam or even security cams being received by server that will encoded and save the videos while allowing the user to monitor one or more cam online, audio and video syncing is important here, and players tricks will not help. Anyway, nice and thank you, you did really nice job.

This version doesn't, i have others, this one i use to capture debug from different tools, parse the output then run command command, it is bidirectional, i use it for building applications instead of batch files, so it should be able to handle InnoSetup and WinLicense ..etc

Mine showed difference in timing with when used 16kb.

I just sent you my unit.

@pyscripter i don't have your hardware or anything even close to it, so when you show a command like "dir C:\Windows /s" takes less than 20 seconds, well this amazing, Can you confirm if both libraries on the same reading buffer length, your i think yours at 16kb by default, while mine is left fixed by a constant at 4kb, could that have such huge difference ? in theory it might as "dir C:\Windows /s" do takes minutes on my machine, meaning the output is huge and again the flush operations could causing this difference.

Here a suggestion and highly important; Make sure all call backs from the system 100% safe against exception, you can't raise an exception or allow the RTL to raise one, make sure to encapsulate the code with try..except and no re-raise.