
mythtv at longhome
Apr 10, 2007, 6:42 AM
Post #7 of 11
(956 views)
Permalink
|
I relise this has been done to death in the softpad discussion, but this has already proved to be incredibly useful for me, and I'd like to give it a chance for the others that are screaming out for it. I've had some positive feedback from some friends that have tried this. I would, however, like to make it as generic as possible in the hope that it could be committed. As I see it there are two possible routes to take this. 1. The current method, by somewhat 'hardening' the global pre and post roll enough to make it allocate a different tuner, but not enough create a conflict where there aren't enough tuners to service it. I could enhance this solution by: - Providing an option to switch this behaviour on / off. - Allow higher priority programs to maintain padding, setting lower priorities as conflicts. 2. Use the per-recording padding instead. I would propose the following: - A global default setting - I don't believe this exists at the moment, and I, for example, would want to set 5 mins either side on ALL recordings. I suppose that even a channel default could be viable, but not vital. - A per recording (and global default) hard / soft setting. This would allow certain recordings to enforce padding, whereas for others it would be soft. - Again, as in solution 1, priority could be used in combination with the softpadded (but not hardpadded) recordings, to ensure that padding doesn't get dropped for really important stuff. I _think_ my solution already takes in to account tuner priority**, and would rather drop padding than allocate to a lower priority tuner - in the same way that a later showing would be used instead of a lower tuner priority, so as far as I know my current solution doesn't have any negative impact, and in theory could be committed as is. I think the only issue is one of intended use of the pre and post roll functions. The only reasons I would like to see this committed are that I genuinely feel that a large number of people would benefit from this, and I would rather not have to maintain a seperate SVN tree for these changes. I can potentially also see how I can extend these changes to support show start triggers (ie PDC, or the new EIT triggers for freeview playback in the UK) I would appreciate any more comments before I start on the work. Thanks Martin **I just checked... it does, but not quite in the ideal way. I can change it. Currently: - It will try other showings before using a lower priority tuner... - however, if it can't manage another showing _with_ padding, then it'll try other tuners before trying other showings _without_ padding. I think this probably should be: - It will try other showings before using a lower priority tuner... - and, it will try them again, without padding, before trying another tuner. Let me know what you think... the second needs a rearangement of the logic, which is slightly more complicated, but it is probably preferable - I don't know really, all my tuners have the same priority. On Mon, April 9, 2007 12:37 am, Martin Long wrote: > > Finally... worked out all of the MoveHigherRecords stuff, putting in > multiple passes where necessary. The logic looks ok, but I use these > functions very rarely - 4 tuners means TryAnotherShowing hardly ever gets > used on my box. > > This should be my last build for a while, with any luck. Sorry for the > noise! > > Martin > > > -----Original Message----- > From: mythtv-dev-bounces [at] mythtv [mailto:mythtv-dev-bounces [at] mythtv] > On Behalf Of Martin Long > Sent: 08 April 2007 22:09 > To: 'Development of mythtv' > Subject: Re: [mythtv] Preserve global padding. [UNSTABLE] > > > Ok... the wife's a bit annoyed, but I did it. It's just a case of running > 2 > passes of a part of the scheduler. The first time padding will clash, > ensuring a new cardinput will be used, however, it may be unable to > schedule some recordings. The second pass will loop through anything that > is still rsUnknown, this time ignoring padding, and allowing those > remaining programs to be scheduled. > > It seems to work well, and it all comes out ok when you add new or remove > existing schedules. > > I need to take some time and get a better understanding of > TryAnotherShowing, MoveHigherRecords and getConflicting to make sure I've > got the logic right for all the various scenarios, so some help here would > be greatly appreciated. > > Hope someone finds this useful. > > > Martin > _______________________________________________ > mythtv-dev mailing list mythtv-dev [at] mythtv > http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev > > _______________________________________________ mythtv-dev mailing list mythtv-dev [at] mythtv http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
|