Mailing List Archive: MythTV: Users

Time to take the next step...

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 15, 2008, 5:47 PM

Post #1 of 38 (4135 views)
Permalink

Time to take the next step...

Hi, Folks!

My first post to this list... I've been "sort'a" following along (mostly
via Gossamer Threads) for awhile now, but never quite got around to
subscribing. Now that that has finally been tended to, I have several
items to discuss.

First and foremost, a big honkin' THANK YOU! to the MythTV developers, and
all the folks who continue to support it. Myth is not only one of *the*
coolest pieces of software I've ever come across in my nearly 30 years of
working with computers, it is also one of the most IMPORTANT pieces of
software currently on the planet. Its very existence (let alone how well
it works) stands as irrefutable testimony how utterly pathetic and
transparent the lies of the MPAA and the Cable-TV industry really are. OK,
enough of the soap box.

Now, a little background...

I built my first MythTV box about 7-8 months ago. It is a relatively
simple stand-alone FE/BE system based on a mildly "hot-rodded" Dell GX240
(P4 @ ~1.6GHz, 1GB RAM, 120GB HDD, two PVR-150s and an MSI FX5200 AGP video
card) in their "Small Desktop" case (chosen in large part because this case
will fit nicely into the shelving with all the other components -- amps,
preamps, tuners, CD/DVD players, VCRs etc. -- in my Living Room
entertainment center). After a few false starts. I got it up and running
fairly easily, thanks mostly to MythBuntu's more-or-less idiot-proof
installation routine; and it has been chugging along without major incident
ever since (it was originally intended mostly as a "proof of concept"
effort; but it's surprising how quickly we have already become more-or-less
dependant on it). While there are still a few nagging issues (more on
these later), overall performance has been OK (occasionally, it noticeably
"struggles" to keep up the pace when multiple jobs are happening at once --
such as recording/comflagging a couple of programs while watching a
previously-made recording -- but this is both rare enough and mild enough
to not be a deal-breaker).

Until recently, this was strictly an NTSC-based affair, with output from
the video card's S-Video port feeding an old Toshiba 32-inch CRT-based TV.
But one day, I came home from a few days at my shore house to find that the
Toshiba did not want to power up -- just continuous odd "motor-boating"
sounds out of the speakers, as the power supply apparently tried to kick
in, then nothing. Two or three more attempts, and it finally powered-up --
WHEW! At that point, we started leaving it on 24/7, just to be safe; and
the problem did not recur. But the handwriting was on the wall, and I now
had a *really* good excuse to go spend money with the full approval of the
Spousal Unit; so I semi-immediately went out and purchased a Sharp
LC-37D64U (1080p, lots of inputs/outputs, decent picture quality, and
overall width *just* under 36 inches -- which was a critical dimension for
reasons not relevant here). This is now driven off that same video card's
DVI port via a DVI/HDMI adapter and a long-ish HDMI cable; and after
resetting the MythTV front-end to deal with the high-res/wide-screen
display format (which went far more smoothly than I'd feared), all is again
right with the world. Except...

Now that I've gotten a "taste" of HDTV (via the TV's built-in ATSC tuner),
I want to make that my default recording format in MythTV. And given that
I am (mostly by choice) limited to a terrestrial antenna for my TV signals,
I have to do it by February 17th. Which brings me to the crux of this
(already too long -- sorry) missive.

Based on my preliminary research, I don't think it is practical or
desirable to attempt upgrading the existing FE/BE system to handle ATSC
recording. Given the smallish case, it is absolutely limited to one HDD
and two tuner cards; and I don't want to ditch the PVR-150s just yet, as
they remain useful for those stations which are not yet broadcasting a
usable-here DTV signal (the local channel assignments are due to become
MUCH more compatible with my crappy rooftop antenna once the so-called "DTV
Transition" deadline finally gets here; but in the meantime...), and for
dubbing from S-VHS or whatever via the S-Video input. Besides, the "long
term" plan calls for this system to eventually migrate to the Master
Bedroom, where it must (at least for awhile) cope with an existing 27-inch
conventional (i.e., NTSC-only) TV set which is still far too new and in far
too good shape to abandon just yet.

So I'm figuring on adding a backend-only system to the mix, to be stashed
away in my basement (convenient to both my antenna feed and my main
Ethernet switch) and operated solely (or at least near-solely) via the
existing BE/FE system in the Living Room. To that end, I have acquired
what I believe to be a suitable "donor" system:

Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe mobo
nVidia nForce2 chipset; 1 AGP + 5 PCI slots,
on-board Gigabit Ethernet, 6-channel audio & SPDIF headers, etc.
AMD Athlon XP 3000+ (2.167 GHz actual clock rate)
1GB DDR RAM
Enermax EG475P-VE PSU
Generic "Mid-tower" case which happens to have about 7 internal drive bays
80GB EIDE HDD

The general plan is to add at least four ***BIG*** drives in a RAID-5
arrangement, plus as many ATSC tuners as I can manage to stuff in the box
(while I can get by "for now" with two ATSC tuners, I'm certain that in the
long run I's want _at_least_ three or four). I don't really care about
NTSC tuners, as I already have that covered with the existing FE/BE system
(and an assortment of pre-existing VCRs & DVD recorders to take up the
slack, at least until February -- did I mention that we habitually
time-shift *everything*?). As a side note, the existing 80GB EIDE drive
will probably be cannibalized for future use in an unrelated desktop
system, as I have several 10-30GB models in my "spares" pile(s), any of
which will easily suffice for the boot/OS/apps drive.

But I could use some guidance on several of the specific details of that
"general plan"...

First, regarding the drives... I'm currently assuming 1.0TB SATA models
(probably either the Samsung HD103UJ or the Western Digital WD10EACS; the
former are faster, but the latter might be easier on the power supply).
I'm tempted by the 1.5TB Seagates, but too many folks seem to be having big
problems with those. I'd like to use a true hardware-RAID card on general
principles; but the only suitable one I've thus far found (the 3ware
9500S-4LP) is well over $300 -- a not-insignificant line item on the
budget. OTOH, I've heard lots of good things about Linux's implementation
of software-RAID; and I *think* this system has enough raw hardware
horsepower to cope with that (particularly considering its Back-End-Only
role). So perhaps just some ultra-cheap SATA card (such as the Masscool
XWT-RC040; under $20 at NewEgg) will be adequate -- *IF* it will properly
support 1TB+ drives (the Masscool seems to have some issues on that front).

Any other suggestions for SATA cards? BTW... The motherboard has two
built-in SATA ports (based on the Silicon Image 3112A chip); but
apparently, I'd still need to burn a PCI slot for a "port expander" card in
order to run 4+ SATA drives. So therefore, I might as well use a four (or
more) port add-in SATA controller for the RAID array, leaving the on-board
SATA ports free to support other devices (such as the boot drive or a
DVD-R/W drive) in the future, right? Or is there such a thing as an
"in-line" SATA port expander (i.e., one that is effectively implemented as
a part of the cabling system)? Over the years, I've mostly used SCSI for
"serious" storage applications, and everything from ST-506 to EIDE for
run-of-the-mill desktop systems; so I'm a little out of my depth with SATA.
Hence, any/all pointers will be appreciated.

The other big "unknown" is the tuners. As mentioned above, we are
compulsive time-shifters; it is not at all unusual for us to be recording
(in one way or another -- at one point I had five VCRs in use here, plus
three more at the shore house) three or four programs simultaneously. So I
want to maximize the number of tuners, vis-a-vis the available PCI slots.
I've looked around for suitable "dual-tuner" cards (i.e., the ATSC
equivalent of the old Hauppage PVR-500), but to no avail. Does anybody
make such a thing? If so, is it supported by Myth? If not, why is this
rather obvious market niche being overlooked?

One possible solution to this is the SiliconDust HDHomeRun. But at least
as I understand it, this would add several additional layers of complexity
to the project: If I have, say, two or three "conventional" ATSC tuner
cards in the system *plus* one or more HDHomeRun boxes hung off the
network, having the MythTV system decide which one to use for any given
recording becomes more complex. If I were to forego internal tuner cards
entirely, I'd need _at_least_ two (preferably three) HDHomeRun boxes. This
leads to the question of how does Myth keep them sorted out?

And either way (i.e., all HDHomeRuns, or a mix of HDHomeRun & PCI tuner
cards), given that the HDHomeRun(s) would be on "equal footing" on the LAN
with both the existing FE/BE system and the new BE-only system, I'm not
certain how I could force the stuff coming from the HDHomeRun(s) to be
stored *only* on the new BE-only system, where there will (presumably) be
adequate room for it (high-def recordings would quickly swamp that little
120GB drive in the existing FE/BE system).

Those are the major questions weighing on my mind at the moment; but before
closing, let me also mention those "few nagging issues" which remain on the
FE/BE system...

1. - I have not been able to get MythArchive to work. I have it loaded and
enabled, and by navigating the various menus, I CAN find (at least some of
-- it's been awhile since I last tried this, so allow for fuzzy
recollection) my recordings files. But once I've selected a particular
program that I want to dump to DVD, it seems to just hang. At one point I
found a MythWiki article which seemed to partially address this problem
<http://tinyurl.com/65qvfo>; but I have been unable to confirm that this is
indeed the problem, or troubleshoot it further, because...

2. - Since the system was put into "production" use, I no longer have a
"real" keyboard or monitor permanently connected to the system (I do have a
USB-based wireless keyboard that has proven especially handy for routine
maintenance chores, like running Synaptic; but this has not proven adequate
for *this* purpose). I have also not (as yet) succeeded in logging into
the system from a remote terminal (such as a terminal session on one of my
Linux-based desktop systems, or using PuTTY from a WinBox. This would seem
to be a prerequisite for examining/modifying file/directory permissions, as
suggested by the above-noted reference.

3. - I'm currently using the A415-HPG-A remote control provided with one of
my PVR-150 cards. After much futzing around with the various (conflicting)
config files that I found recommended for the Hauppage remotes, I achieved
partial success -- the main navigational controls (Play, Pause, Skip
Forward/Back, the four-way arrows & "OK" button, etc.) work -- but many of
the more "minor" controls (such as the source selectors, or the four
colored buttons at the bottom) do nothing, despite the fact that I can
think of several things that would be worth doing. I am aware that these
functions are, to at least some degree, customizable; but after the hassle
I had getting it working even this well, I was/am a bit gun shy about
potentially violating the old "If it ain't broke..." rule. Can someone
give me (or point me to) a step-by-step "cookbook" approach to setting up
the rest of these buttons?

4. - On a somewhat related note: Am I correct in assuming that as long as
the existing FE/BE box remains the only Front-End in the system, this same
remote control setup can be used to direct the new Back-End box (at least
to the degree that it will be necessary to do so, such as to schedule
recordings & such), and the Front-End will then relay the requisite
commands to the (secondary) Back-End over the net?

I'm sure there are other things to deal with (or at least will be, after I
get further into this project); but this should be more than enough for
now. Thanks to all for any help offered.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

jakeisawake at gmail

Nov 15, 2008, 6:18 PM

Post #2 of 38 (4064 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

> One possible solution to this is the SiliconDust HDHomeRun. But at least
> as I understand it, this would add several additional layers of complexity
> to the project: If I have, say, two or three "conventional" ATSC tuner
> cards in the system *plus* one or more HDHomeRun boxes hung off the
> network, having the MythTV system decide which one to use for any given
> recording becomes more complex. If I were to forego internal tuner cards
> entirely, I'd need _at_least_ two (preferably three) HDHomeRun boxes. This
> leads to the question of how does Myth keep them sorted out?
>
> And either way (i.e., all HDHomeRuns, or a mix of HDHomeRun & PCI tuner
> cards), given that the HDHomeRun(s) would be on "equal footing" on the LAN
> with both the existing FE/BE system and the new BE-only system, I'm not
> certain how I could force the stuff coming from the HDHomeRun(s) to be
> stored *only* on the new BE-only system, where there will (presumably) be
> adequate room for it (high-def recordings would quickly swamp that little
> 120GB drive in the existing FE/BE system).
>

wow, that was a long e-mail to read. i'll stick to commenting on the
hdhomerun as we have one and love it. each hdhomerun has a unique
identifier mythtv can use if you have more than one hdhomerun on your
lan. also a tuner will only record or be controlled by a backend that
it is setup on. so for the hdhomerun it doesn't matter that it lives
on your lan, you set it up on the backend you want to record to (be it
a master or slave) and it acts like any other tuner card. in general
i'd say go for the hdhomerun if you want to do atsc and just add as
many to your network as you need. lots of people here use them and
love them and i don't think i've seen a complaint from anyone using
the hdhomerun.

hope that helps and welcome to the party ;)
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

robbinsck1 at gmail

Nov 15, 2008, 7:54 PM

Post #3 of 38 (4059 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

Nice message, looks like you may be ready to be a true timeshifter.

I'll just comment on a few things I remember.

I don't know of any "piggyback" sata cables. But don't limit yourself to just sata drives in your main backend. There's always a stand-alone network drives, a couple 1 TB's in each front end etc. My opinion is Raid for the actual recordings is overkill, after all if one does crash there will be reruns. However, what should have raid redundancy is your main OS and database as well as a automated regulary scheduled "off-site" or at least "off-server" backup.

Lirc: My thoughts are if your mythbox isn't perfect, fix it (after a backup or two). After all you did it from scratch, you can do it again. And it will be better the next time around. Lirc is an AMAZING thing, you can practically make it do anything. With a little research of things like irrecord, irw and others you can make any button of any remote work with myth. There really is no limit, if you can dream it, we can probably help you do it.

Your export problem is most likely related to your dvd-rw drive not being itentified properly in settings or maybe there's no ffmpeg on your system or something to the sort. We would need to see your logs to know for sure.

Um, that's all I can remember. But Yes
Myth really does ROCK!

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

raker1000 at gmail

Nov 15, 2008, 8:21 PM

Post #4 of 38 (4037 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:54 PM, <robbinsck1 [at] gmail> wrote:

> Nice message, looks like you may be ready to be a true timeshifter.
>
> I'll just comment on a few things I remember.
>
> I don't know of any "piggyback" sata cables. But don't limit yourself to
> just sata drives in your main backend. There's always a stand-alone network
> drives, a couple 1 TB's in each front end etc. My opinion is Raid for the
> actual recordings is overkill, after all if one does crash there will be
> reruns. However, what should have raid redundancy is your main OS and
> database as well as a automated regulary scheduled "off-site" or at least
> "off-server" backup.
>
> Lirc: My thoughts are if your mythbox isn't perfect, fix it (after a backup
> or two). After all you did it from scratch, you can do it again. And it will
> be better the next time around. Lirc is an AMAZING thing, you can
> practically make it do anything. With a little research of things like
> irrecord, irw and others you can make any button of any remote work with
> myth. There really is no limit, if you can dream it, we can probably help
> you do it.
>
> Your export problem is most likely related to your dvd-rw drive not being
> itentified properly in settings or maybe there's no ffmpeg on your system or
> something to the sort. We would need to see your logs to know for sure.
>
> Um, that's all I can remember. But Yes
> Myth really does ROCK!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users [at] mythtv
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>

I Second raid 5 being unnecessary for recording storage. If you
have a large video file library, you may want to keep those on a
raid 5 volume, but raid 5 is better for reading than writing, and
as robbins said above, there are always reruns if you have a
disk crash. Also, you'd be better off giving one disk to each
tuner, that way the tuners wont be fighting for i/o time, and
the disks wont be thrashing trying to write multiple threads.

raker1000 at gmail

Nov 15, 2008, 8:33 PM

Post #5 of 38 (4040 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:47 PM, VCRAddict
<MythTV_01 [at] appropriate-tech>wrote:

>
> 3. - I'm currently using the A415-HPG-A remote control provided with one of
> my PVR-150 cards. After much futzing around with the various (conflicting)
> config files that I found recommended for the Hauppage remotes, I achieved
> partial success -- the main navigational controls (Play, Pause, Skip
> Forward/Back, the four-way arrows & "OK" button, etc.) work -- but many of
> the more "minor" controls (such as the source selectors, or the four
> colored buttons at the bottom) do nothing, despite the fact that I can
> think of several things that would be worth doing. I am aware that these
> functions are, to at least some degree, customizable; but after the hassle
> I had getting it working even this well, I was/am a bit gun shy about
> potentially violating the old "If it ain't broke..." rule. Can someone
> give me (or point me to) a step-by-step "cookbook" approach to setting up
> the rest of these buttons?
>
>
I found that making your own remote config file does the trick better than,
as you call it, futzing around with those you find on the web. Check out
http://www.mythtv.org/docs/mythtv-HOWTO-8.html, and pay attention to
the section about irrecord. I, too, had my remote somewhat functional,
and then went through the process described there, and not only did
I get all the buttons working the way I wanted them, I learned something
in the process! :) Also, try google 'irrecord' for more info.

allen.p.edwards at gmail

Nov 15, 2008, 10:44 PM

Post #6 of 38 (4034 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

I think you need more processor power for ATSC system. I have a
frontend only with a 2.4GHz P4 and it is not quite fast enough even
running XvMC (which you do not want to run). My FE/BE runs a 5400+
and it is fine.

HDHR is the way to go. Small, low power, built in IR Rx.

Good luck,

Allen
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

stevehodge at gmail

Nov 15, 2008, 10:52 PM

Post #7 of 38 (4045 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 7:44 PM, Allen Edwards
<allen.p.edwards [at] gmail> wrote:
> I think you need more processor power for ATSC system. I have a
> frontend only with a 2.4GHz P4 and it is not quite fast enough even
> running XvMC (which you do not want to run). My FE/BE runs a 5400+
> and it is fine.

As of yesterday's nVidia announcement things are looking much improved
on the hardware-decoding front. So I'd either go for the lower
processor (and trust that nVidia's new API delivers) or wait a little
while to see how things pan out.

Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 15, 2008, 10:58 PM

Post #8 of 38 (4034 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 09:18 PM 11/15/08 -0500, Jake wrote:
>
> wow, that was a long e-mail to read. i'll stick to commenting on the
> hdhomerun as we have one and love it. each hdhomerun has a unique
> identifier mythtv can use if you have more than one hdhomerun on your
> lan. also a tuner will only record or be controlled by a backend that
> it is setup on. so for the hdhomerun it doesn't matter that it lives
> on your lan, you set it up on the backend you want to record to (be it
> a master or slave) and it acts like any other tuner card.

That's good to know, and would seem to help my particular application quite
a bit. Thank you. One HDHR-specific question I forgot to ask earlier...
How does Myth control the tuner box (such as for changing channels), over
the LAN or via an IR "blaster"? The former would seem the "cleaner"
approach (and less of a setup hassle); but thus far, my Google-searching
has not turned up any sort of definitive answer.

> in general
> i'd say go for the hdhomerun if you want to do atsc and just add as
> many to your network as you need.

I very well might do just that. As I mentioned, I already have my NTSC
needs adequately covered for now (and for the foreseeable future, presuming
I also have sufficient ATSC capacity), so there's no point in putting
additional NTSC-capable tuners in the box. And I just noticed that NewEgg
has these for under $170 shipped, or effectively $85 per tuner card -- not
bad, compared to what else I've been seeing. Have the much-talked-about
defective power supply issues been rectified yet?

But getting back to the IR emitter issue... If indeed that's how Myth
controls the tuners, and presuming I have multiple HDHR boxes, I suspect I
would need at least one such gadget for *each* HDHR box -- which brings up
the question of how Myth keeps *those* devices straight. Or am I just
over-thinking this?

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 15, 2008, 11:35 PM

Post #9 of 38 (4044 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 03:54 AM 11/16/08 +0000, robbinsck1 [at] gmail wrote:
>
> Nice message, looks like you may be ready to be a true timeshifter.
>

Heh. Been that for *years*. I still have three Beta VCRs (one of them in
service!).

> I'll just comment on a few things I remember.
>
> I don't know of any "piggyback" sata cables. But don't limit yourself to
> just sata drives in your main backend. There's always a stand-alone
> network drives, a couple 1 TB's in each front end etc.

The existing FE/BE won't support an external HDD (no SCSI, FireWire, no
eSATA, and the USB ports are only v1.0 which is much too slow). Besides, I
really don't want to screw around with the existing FE/BE system _at_least_
until I get the new back-end up and running. And even then, I'd be more
likely to just build a whole new replacement FE/BE system for the Living
Room (thus freeing up the existing one to move to the MBR) than attempt to
"fix what ain't broke" in-place.

As for hanging "external" drives off the new back-end via USB or
whatever... I'm guessing that would impose even more of a performance
bottleneck than doing software RAID on a stack of in-box drives. Plus it's
more clutter and exposed cabling for the cat to attack. Maybe as a
dedicated backup solution, or down the road if/when I decide I want a
quick-'n'-dirty way to add more storage to the back-end system without
rebuilding the system or adding yet another backend box. But for now, I'm
pretty much set on using internal drives, and keeping at least the bulk of
them in that one box.

> My opinion is Raid for the actual recordings is overkill, after all if
> one does crash there will be reruns.

You don't know my wife -- or how addicted I am to certain forms of auto
racing.

;-)

Seriously... Given the existence of cost-effective 1TB+ drives, as long as
I can get at least short-term fault-tolerance for a "cost" of only 25% (or
less) of my total storage capacity, I'm quite OK with that. I fully
understand that RAID does *not* obviate the need for regular backups; but
it does buy me some "unpleasant surprise" insurance.

> However, what should have raid
> redundancy is your main OS and database as well as a automated regulary
> scheduled "off-site" or at least "off-server" backup.

I *may* look at implementing the boot/os/apps "drive" as a mirrored pair
under Linux software RAID, if I can find a pair of appropriately matched
smallish drives in my spares pile.

However, somewhere in the deeper recesses of my (very unreliable, these
days) BioRAM, I seem to recall that there is some sort of Catch-22/"After
you, Alphonse" issue WRT using Linux software RAID on the same drive volume
you're attempting to boot Linux from (something about when in the boot
process the RAID drivers actually get loaded). I'll need to do more
research before making a decision on this.

> Lirc: My thoughts are if your mythbox isn't perfect, fix it (after a
> backup or two).

I'd love to. But I don't want to put its usability at risk in the process.
We *do* count on that machine being operational on a daily basis. I can't
afford significant down-time.

> After all you did it from scratch, you can do it again. And it will be
> better the next time around.

Maybe. But with everything else that's on my plate at the moment, I just
don't have the time or energy for a trial-and-error "forensic development"
process for anything non-critical. That's why I asked for a pointer to a
cookbook approach. Failing that, it works "well enough" for now.

> Your export problem is most likely related to your dvd-rw drive not
> being itentified properly in settings or maybe there's no ffmpeg on
> your system or something to the sort. We would need to see your logs
> to know for sure.

If you can give me a pointer to which specific log files you need, I can
take a stab at finding/posting them.

> Um, that's all I can remember. But Yes
> Myth really does ROCK!

Indeed! ;-)

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 15, 2008, 11:49 PM

Post #10 of 38 (4037 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 10:44 PM 11/15/08 -0800, Allen Edwards wrote:
>
> I think you need more processor power for ATSC system. I have a
> frontend only with a 2.4GHz P4 and it is not quite fast enough

But you're talking about a system which includes a Front-End (and one which
supports high-def playback, at that). That is not the situation I'm
dealing with. The new system will be a Back-End ONLY. My understanding is
that this reduces the host system CPU/memory requirements *drastically*, as
compared to a FE/BE system.

> even running XvMC (which you do not want to run).

Why, pray tell, would I not want to run XvMC? I'm using it now on the
existing (stand-alone) FE/BE system, and it seems to do just fine -- tho'
admittedly, I've yet to try playing back any high-def content.

> My FE/BE runs a 5400+ and it is fine.

I should hope so!

> HDHR is the way to go. Small, low power, built in IR Rx.

So then, Myth *does* use an IR blaster to control the HDHR? If so, and
presuming multiple HDHR boxes stacked up on the shelf, I'd need multiple IR
blasters hung off the Myth box, *and* I'd need to jury-rig some way of
"dedicating" each IR emitter to *that* particular HDHR, with no possibility
of "crosstalk" between them.

This is starting to sound more and more Rube Goldberg -ish.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 15, 2008, 11:50 PM

Post #11 of 38 (4056 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 07:52 PM 11/16/08 +1300, Steve Hodge wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> As of yesterday's nVidia announcement things are looking much improved
> on the hardware-decoding front.

Pointer, please?

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

stevehodge at gmail

Nov 16, 2008, 12:00 AM

Post #12 of 38 (4052 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:50 PM, VCRAddict
<MythTV_01 [at] appropriate-tech> wrote:
> At 07:52 PM 11/16/08 +1300, Steve Hodge wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> >
> > As of yesterday's nVidia announcement things are looking much improved
> > on the hardware-decoding front.
>
> Pointer, please?

http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/357341

You can also search Google from VDPAU.

Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 16, 2008, 12:34 AM

Post #13 of 38 (4025 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 09:00 PM 11/16/08 +1300, Steve Hodge wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:50 PM, VCRAddict
> <MythTV_01 [at] appropriate-tech> wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > Pointer, please?
>
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/357341

Thanks.

That does seem encouraging, even if it does not have an immediate impact on
me personally. At least I can now safely stop scrounging the world for old
FX5200-based video cards to stockpile -- I already have one spare, and I
suspect that by the time I need to build a third Front-End system, this
will be real *and* the supported video cards will be "affordable".

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

finlay at moeraki

Nov 16, 2008, 12:43 AM

Post #14 of 38 (4031 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

VCRAddict wrote:
>
> So then, Myth *does* use an IR blaster to control the HDHR? If so, and
> presuming multiple HDHR boxes stacked up on the shelf, I'd need multiple IR
> blasters hung off the Myth box, *and* I'd need to jury-rig some way of
> "dedicating" each IR emitter to *that* particular HDHR, with no possibility
> of "crosstalk" between them.
>
Mythtv controls the HDHR boxes over the network using TCP sockets. No IR
blasters required. I think the IR mentioned is for use with a remote
control - each box has one.

John
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

johan.heikkila at gmail

Nov 16, 2008, 3:19 AM

Post #15 of 38 (4007 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

I have the Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe mobo as a backend and have experienced
stability issues. The motherboard temp has to be kept low so cooling
has to be good. The onboard SATA controller has some issues, newer
bios is needed. It didn't always find the attached drives upon
booting. I use a PCI SATA controller. I don't recommend software raid
with this setup. A better mobo and sata controller is recommended. I'm
going to throw it out. Already bought a Supermicro PDSGE motherboard
including a PCI-X SAS controller. This is a server-like motherboard
with ECC memory and I expect better stability than the Asus.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 16, 2008, 9:14 AM

Post #16 of 38 (3989 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 01:19 PM 11/16/08 +0200, =?UTF-8?Q?Johan_Heikkil=C3=A4?= wrote:
>
> I have the Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe mobo as a backend and have experienced
> stability issues. The motherboard temp has to be kept low so cooling
> has to be good.

Odd. I have had two of those boards in my general-purpose workhorse
systems for upwards of four years now, and I have NOT had the issues you
describe. That said, I'm using good quality cases & PSUs, and I'm also
using Athlon XP-M "Mobile" CPUs in them, which have lower power consumption
(and thus produce less heat) than the standard "Desktop" CPUs. But on the
third hand, I'm also overclocking those same CPUs, and running them at
slightly over their "nominal" Vcc to ensure stability. So who knows..? I
suppose there could be any number of explanations for this discrepancy in
our experiences.

> The onboard SATA controller has some issues, newer
> bios is needed.

At this point, I don't recall what BIOS version these systems are running,
and I'm not about to re-boot them to find out. But I do recall updating
both of them awhile back, most likely using one of the BIOSes referenced here:

<http://www.nforcershq.com/forum/1-vt69351.html?start=0>

No big deal.

> It didn't always find the attached drives upon
> booting. I use a PCI SATA controller.

Which one, and how do you like it? This is one of the things I need to
settle on for the new Back-End.

> I don't recommend software raid with this setup.

Why not? Most everything I've heard about Linux's implementation of
Software RAID has been positive. Note that I am NOT contemplating using
the "FakeRAID" provided by many of the el-cheapo "pseudo-RAID" cards out
there. It will be either true Hardware RAID (such as the previously
mentioned 3ware 9500S-4LP), or the software RAID provided by Linux itself.

> A better mobo and sata controller is recommended.

For a pure Back-End-Only system? I've been considering that 2.167 GHz K7
to already be gross overkill for this application.

> I'm going to throw it out.

Don't do that! Seriously!

If you're really bound and determined to get rid of that board, I'll at
least cover your shipping costs, and keep it as a spare. Contact me
off-list to discuss this further, if you like.

> Already bought a Supermicro PDSGE motherboard
> including a PCI-X SAS controller. This is a server-like motherboard
> with ECC memory and I expect better stability than the Asus.

I sincerely hope it all works out for you; but I *still* don't think the
mobo is really the root of the problems you've had.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 16, 2008, 12:38 PM

Post #17 of 38 (3987 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 12:43 AM 11/16/08 -0800, John Finlay wrote:
>
[snip]
> >
> Mythtv controls the HDHR boxes over the network using TCP sockets. No IR
> blasters required.

That is excellent news, BUT...

> I think the IR mentioned is for use with a remote
> control - each box has one.

Now I'm confused. If the Myth box is controlling the HDHR withOUT using
IR, why would the HDHR need a remote? I mean, I can understand coupling
the system remote to the tuner in the case of plug-in (PCI, etc.) tuner
cards (such as the Hauppage PVR-150s in my existing FE/BE system); but how
can something "hung off the LAN, out there somewhere" couple to LIRC
running on the Myth box?

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

mikep at randomtraveller

Nov 16, 2008, 1:32 PM

Post #18 of 38 (3998 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

VCRAddict wrote:
> At 12:43 AM 11/16/08 -0800, John Finlay wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> > >
> > Mythtv controls the HDHR boxes over the network using TCP sockets. No IR
> > blasters required.
>
> That is excellent news, BUT...
>
> > I think the IR mentioned is for use with a remote
> > control - each box has one.
>
> Now I'm confused. If the Myth box is controlling the HDHR withOUT using
> IR, why would the HDHR need a remote? I mean, I can understand coupling
> the system remote to the tuner in the case of plug-in (PCI, etc.) tuner
> cards (such as the Hauppage PVR-150s in my existing FE/BE system); but how
> can something "hung off the LAN, out there somewhere" couple to LIRC
> running on the Myth box?
>
You are assuming that all HDHRs sold are connected to Myth systems, which
obviously isn't true. Other system architectures could use the remote in the
HDHR the same way Myth uses the remote in a PVR-150, or in some other fashion.

--

Mike Perkins

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

robbinsck1 at gmail

Nov 16, 2008, 1:39 PM

Post #19 of 38 (3987 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

> I'll just comment on a few things I remember.
>
> I don't know of any "piggyback" sata cables. But don't limit yourself to
> just sata drives in your main backend. There's always a stand-alone
> network drives, a couple 1 TB's in each front end etc.
>

The existing FE/BE won't support an external HDD (no SCSI, FireWire, no
eSATA, and the USB ports are only v1.0 which is much too slow). Besides, I
really don't want to screw around with the existing FE/BE system _at_least_
until I get the new back-end up and running. And even then, I'd be more
likely to just build a whole new replacement FE/BE system for the Living
Room (thus freeing up the existing one to move to the MBR) than attempt to
"fix what ain't broke" in-place.

As for hanging "external" drives off the new back-end via USB or
whatever... I'm guessing that would impose even more of a performance
bottleneck than doing software RAID on a stack of in-box drives. Plus it's
more clutter and exposed cabling for the cat to attack. Maybe as a
dedicated backup solution, or down the road if/when I decide I want a
quick-'n'-dirty way to add more storage to the back-end system without
rebuilding the system or adding yet another backend box. But for now, I'm
pretty much set on using internal drives, and keeping at least the bulk of
them in that one box.

> My opinion is Raid for the actual recordings is overkill, after all if
> one does crash there will be reruns.
>

You don't know my wife -- or how addicted I am to certain forms of auto
racing.

;-)

Seriously... Given the existence of cost-effective 1TB+ drives, as long as
I can get at least short-term fault-tolerance for a "cost" of only 25% (or
less) of my total storage capacity, I'm quite OK with that. I fully
understand that RAID does *not* obviate the need for regular backups; but
it does buy me some "unpleasant surprise" insurance.

Like you said it all boils down to how many pci tuners you have. If
you get a good board with 5 pci slots and 4 sata's you should be fine
with...say 3 PVR 500's (6 analog tuners) a 4 port sata raid controller
and some other PVR card in the remaining slot. Then throw a HDHomerun
in the mix, that will essentially give you 9 tuners and 8 HD's. You
should find that you wont need a DVD drive in your backend, you will
use one to install etc but just use a usb external type for that.

The HDhomerun is like magic, hook it to an antennae plug in the lan,
tell myth and schedules direct what channels it receives then enjoy
the show, don't think into it to much. You dont need any IR nothing
for it.

> However, what should have raid
> redundancy is your main OS and database as well as a automated regulary
> scheduled "off-site" or at least "off-server" backup.
>

I *may* look at implementing the boot/os/apps "drive" as a mirrored pair
under Linux software RAID, if I can find a pair of appropriately matched
smallish drives in my spares pile.

However, somewhere in the deeper recesses of my (very unreliable, these
days) BioRAM, I seem to recall that there is some sort of Catch-22/"After
you, Alphonse" issue WRT using Linux software RAID on the same drive volume
you're attempting to boot Linux from (something about when in the boot
process the RAID drivers actually get loaded). I'll need to do more
research before making a decision on this.

> Lirc: My thoughts are if your mythbox isn't perfect, fix it (after a
> backup or two).
>

I'd love to. But I don't want to put its usability at risk in the process.
We *do* count on that machine being operational on a daily basis. I can't
afford significant down-time.

> After all you did it from scratch, you can do it again. And it will be
> better the next time around.
>

Maybe. But with everything else that's on my plate at the moment, I just
don't have the time or energy for a trial-and-error "forensic development"
process for anything non-critical. That's why I asked for a pointer to a
cookbook approach. Failing that, it works "well enough" for now.

As far a cookbook for lirc there really isnt one unless you want to be
happy with what other people like...It's really not that difficult and
posses no risk to your system if you make a couple of these 3 files
first.

If your remote is working then your 99.9% done, there are 3 files to
look at. The first is /etc/lirc/hardware.conf to see what file is
being read. A snip looks like this.

# /etc/lirc/hardware.conf
#
#Chosen Remote Control
REMOTE="Custom"
REMOTE_MODULES=""
REMOTE_DRIVER=""
REMOTE_DEVICE="/dev/lirc0"
REMOTE_LIRCD_CONF="/usr/share/lirc/remotes/streamzap/streamzap.conf"
REMOTE_LIRCD_ARGS=""

As you can see it's looking at
/usr/share/lirc/remotes/streamzap/streamzap.conf. which looks like
this...

#
# this config file was automatically generated
# using lirc-0.7.1-CVS(serial) on Fri Feb 4 23:20:56 2005
#
# contributed by Christoph Bartelmus
#
# brand: Streamzap
# model no. of remote control: PC Remote
# devices being controlled by this remote: USB receiver
#

begin remote

name Streamzap
bits 6
flags RC5|CONST_LENGTH
eps 30
aeps 100

one 889 889
zero 889 889
plead 889
pre_data_bits 8
pre_data 0xA3
gap 108344
toggle_bit 2

begin codes
0 0x00
1 0x01
2 0x02
3 0x03
4 0x04
5 0x05
6 0x06
7 0x07
8 0x08
9 0x09
POWER 0x0A
MUTE 0x0B
CH_UP 0x0C
VOL_UP 0x0D
CH_DOWN 0x0E
VOL_DOWN 0x0F
UP 0x10
LEFT 0x11
OK 0x12
RIGHT 0x13
DOWN 0x14
MENU 0x15
EXIT 0x16
PLAY 0x17
PAUSE 0x18
STOP 0x19
|<< 0x1A
>>| 0x1B
RECORD 0x1C
<< 0x1D
>> 0x1E
RED 0x20
GREEN 0x21
YELLOW 0x22
BLUE 0x23
end codes

end remote

and the last file is this /home/<username>/.lirc/mythtv which a snip
looks like this...

begin
remote = streamzap
prog = mythtv
button = OK
config = space
repeat = 0
delay = 0
end

begin
remote = streamzap
prog = mythtv
button = RECORD
config = r
repeat = 0
delay = 0
end

begin
remote = streamzap
prog = mythtv
button = PLAY
config = p
repeat = 0
delay = 0
end

Notice that from streamzap.conf each button is basically assigned to a
word, then in /.lirc/mythtv each word is translated to a physical
keyboard entry. So in other words I have several unused buttons from
streamzap.conf and by using the format

begin
remote = streamzap
prog = mythtv
button = RED
config = d
repeat = 0
delay = 0
end

I just assigned the "d" key to the red button allowing you to delete a
recording with a key press.

Just so you know you can make your own streamzap.conf (called
whateveryouwant.conf) with irrecord, its fun once you try it.

> Your export problem is most likely related to your dvd-rw drive not
> being itentified properly in settings or maybe there's no ffmpeg on
> your system or something to the sort. We would need to see your logs
> to know for sure.
>

If you can give me a pointer to which specific log files you need, I can
take a stab at finding/posting them.

In mythbuntu the logs are in /var/log/mythtv/mythfrontend.log
/var.log/mythtv/mythbackend.log
and for the exporting failure you will need to look in
/var/lib/mythdvd/temp/logs/mythburn.log and progress.log

> Um, that's all I can remember. But Yes
> Myth really does ROCK!
>

Indeed! ;-)

And don't worry, the HDhomerun is like magic, hook it to an antennae
plug in the lan, tell myth and schedules direct what channels it
receives then enjoy the show, don't think into it to much. You dont
need any IR nothing for it.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

ylee at pobox

Nov 16, 2008, 2:12 PM

Post #20 of 38 (3985 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

VCRAddict <MythTV_01 [at] appropriate-tech> says:
> But you're talking about a system which includes a Front-End (and
> one which supports high-def playback, at that).

[...]

> I'm using [XvMC} now on the existing (stand-alone) FE/BE system, and
> it seems to do just fine -- tho' admittedly, I've yet to try playing
> back any high-def content.

These two statements are contradictory, unless I interpret them to
mean that you *believe* your existing 1.6GHz Pentium 4 MythTV box can
act as a high-definition frontend, but have not actually tried it out
as such yet.

As noted, you are not in fact going to be able to play back actual
720p or 1080i MythTV recordings with your existing MythTV box,
regardless of whether you take the backend load off it. A Pentium 4
3.0 GHz is the minimum.

> Why, pray tell, would I not want to run XvMC?

More or less broken for most people with high-definition recordings.

> That is not the situation I'm dealing with. The new system will be
> a Back-End ONLY. My understanding is that this reduces the host
> system CPU/memory requirements *drastically*, as compared to a FE/BE
> system.

Memory, yes.

CPU? Not so much. As noted, recording ATSC streams from a HDHomerun is
very easy from a processing perspective.

> > HDHR is the way to go. Small, low power, built in IR Rx.
>
> So then, Myth *does* use an IR blaster to control the HDHR?

No. It's a network device and backends communicate with it via the
network. As noted, one HDHomerun is distinct from another from a
network-topology perspective.

--
Yeechang Lee <ylee [at] pobox> | San Francisco CA US
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 16, 2008, 3:16 PM

Post #21 of 38 (3981 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 09:32 PM 11/16/08 +0000, Mike Perkins wrote:
>
[snip]

> You are assuming that all HDHRs sold are connected to Myth systems, which
> obviously isn't true.

Well, no, not exactly. But I was assuming that they be used in
fundamentally the same way, with the PVR of whatever stripe) controlling
the tuners (i.e., the HDHR). And if the PVR can indeed do that over the
LAN, what need is there for the IR remote?

> Other system architectures could use the remote in the
> HDHR the same way Myth uses the remote in a PVR-150, or in some other
> fashion.

You mean as a means of inputting commands to the PVR itself (such as to
navigate the GUI, for example)? This would imply that the HDHR is "feeding
back" those commands it receives from the IR remote to the PVR over the
network. I've never seen any mention of that sort of functionality.

Understand, we're now into the realm of idle curiosity more than anything
else. As long as I can count on Myth controlling the HDHR over the net,
with no need to rig IR emitters to the tuner boxes with duct tape (or other
similarly kludged "solutions"), I'm happy. But I would like to better
understand the point & purpose of that IR remote port.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

finlay at moeraki

Nov 16, 2008, 3:28 PM

Post #22 of 38 (3969 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

VCRAddict wrote:
> At 09:32 PM 11/16/08 +0000, Mike Perkins wrote:
>
> > Other system architectures could use the remote in the
> > HDHR the same way Myth uses the remote in a PVR-150, or in some other
> > fashion.
>
> You mean as a means of inputting commands to the PVR itself (such as to
> navigate the GUI, for example)? This would imply that the HDHR is "feeding
> back" those commands it receives from the IR remote to the PVR over the
> network. I've never seen any mention of that sort of functionality.
>
That's what it does - you might find the answers to your questions about
the HDHR by looking at this webpage:

http://www.silicondust.com/products/hdhomerun

John
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 16, 2008, 5:30 PM

Post #23 of 38 (3970 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 04:39 PM 11/16/08 -0500, Kevin Robbins wrote:
>
> > I'll just comment on a few things I remember.
> >
> > I don't know of any "piggyback" sata cables. But don't limit yourself to
> > just sata drives in your main backend. There's always a stand-alone
> > network drives, a couple 1 TB's in each front end etc.
> >
>
> The existing FE/BE won't support an external HDD (no SCSI, FireWire, no
> eSATA, and the USB ports are only v1.0 which is much too slow). Besides, I
> really don't want to screw around with the existing FE/BE system _at_least_
> until I get the new back-end up and running. And even then, I'd be more
> likely to just build a whole new replacement FE/BE system for the Living
> Room (thus freeing up the existing one to move to the MBR) than attempt to
> "fix what ain't broke" in-place.

I left the above intact solely to point out that your method of message
quoting is horridly broken, and makes it look like *you* wrote material
that *I* had actually written earlier, and makes no distinction between the
two. You also left in a LOT of extraneous material that had nothing to do
with your subsequent comments (which I eventually found, but ONLY because I
already knew what I'd written and what I hadn't). Please review the
settings in (and your use of) your mail client to retain proper quoting and
attributions.

> Like you said it all boils down to how many pci tuners you have. If
> you get a good board with 5 pci slots and 4 sata's you should be fine

Well, the (mother)board is already decided on: The Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe I
mentioned in my first message to this list;
nVidia nForce2 chipset; 1 AGP + 5 PCI slots,
on-board Gigabit Ethernet, 6-channel audio & SPDIF headers, etc.
AMD Athlon XP 3000+ (2.167 GHz actual clock rate)
1GB DDR RAM (expandable to at least 3GB, if need be)

> with...say 3 PVR 500's (6 analog tuners) a 4 port sata raid controller
> and some other PVR card in the remaining slot. Then throw a HDHomerun
> in the mix, that will essentially give you 9 tuners and 8 HD's.

Well, as I also mentioned previously, I have no need for NTSC tuners in
*this* system. That's already covered to the extent that it needs to be
covered, at least for now. I *may* eventually migrate one of the PVR-150s
from my existing FE/BE system to this box at some point down the line; but
even so, that won't happen until I have effectively replaced that existing
FE/BE box, which in turn won't happen until *after* the new BE-only box is
up and running.

I'm still collecting information (thanks in large part to this list); but
as of the moment, I will most likely be going with two HDHomeRuns (for a
total of 4 ATSC tuners), and *no* PCI tuner cards. So the PCI "slot
crunch" is really a non-issue. I've still not decided between an "real"
Hardware RAID card vs. a cheap non-RAID (or "fakeRAID", but I wouldn't
actually use that feature) 4-8 port SATA interface; but either way, I'll
have more than enough slots open for it.

> You
> should find that you wont need a DVD drive in your backend, you will
> use one to install etc but just use a usb external type for that.

Actually, I rather suspect it will be "only" a CD-ROM drive. As you note,
it will only be needed for the initial software load -- and CD is more than
adequate for that.

> The HDhomerun is like magic, hook it to an antennae plug in the lan,
> tell myth and schedules direct what channels it receives then enjoy
> the show, don't think into it to much. You dont need any IR nothing
> for it.

Thanks. That's what I wanted to hear.

> As far a cookbook for lirc there really isnt one unless you want to be
> happy with what other people like...It's really not that difficult and
> posses no risk to your system if you make a couple of these 3 files
> first.
>
> If your remote is working then your 99.9% done, there are 3 files to
> look at. The first is /etc/lirc/hardware.conf to see what file is
> being read. A snip looks like this.
>
[snip]

Thanks for this. I'll need to study it in more detail later before I can
comment on it tho'.

> In mythbuntu the logs are in /var/log/mythtv/mythfrontend.log
> /var.log/mythtv/mythbackend.log
> and for the exporting failure you will need to look in
> /var/lib/mythdvd/temp/logs/mythburn.log and progress.log

Thanks also for this. I'll take a look at it tomorrow (tonight's
"disposable time" is rapidly fizzling away).

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV_01 at appropriate-tech

Nov 16, 2008, 6:08 PM

Post #24 of 38 (3972 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

At 02:12 PM 11/16/08 -0800, Yeechang Lee wrote:
>
> VCRAddict <MythTV_01 [at] appropriate-tech> says:
> > But you're talking about a system which includes a Front-End (and
> > one which supports high-def playback, at that).
>
> [...]
>
> > I'm using [XvMC} now on the existing (stand-alone) FE/BE system, and
> > it seems to do just fine -- tho' admittedly, I've yet to try playing
> > back any high-def content.
>
> These two statements are contradictory, unless I interpret them to
> mean that you *believe* your existing 1.6GHz Pentium 4 MythTV box can
> act as a high-definition frontend, but have not actually tried it out
> as such yet.

Well... Almost, but not quite.

We were talking about several different things, and those two comments were
in response to two different statements made by Allen Edwards.
Specifically, the first was in response to his contention that an AMD
Athlon XP 3000+ would be inadequate for my proposed Back-End-Only system
(which I find implausible, to say the least); the latter was in response to
his blanket condemnation of XvMC (which I subsequently noted seems to work
fine on the aforementioned 1.6GHz P4 FE/BE box).

As for whether or not the existing FE will prove adequate for playback of
the stuff the new Back-End captures... that remains to be seen; but I
suspect that I'll *have* to use XvMC for it to work acceptably.

> As noted, you are not in fact going to be able to play back actual
> 720p or 1080i MythTV recordings with your existing MythTV box,
> regardless of whether you take the backend load off it. A Pentium 4
> 3.0 GHz is the minimum.

Even with XvMC? I find that surprising, given other comments & reports
I've read. I seem to recall a lot of folks using things like those little
EPIA micro boards for super-quiet dedicated FE-only systems. ISTM that if
a VIA C3 can work even moderately well, 1.6GHz P4 should not have a
problem. This chart:

<http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/index.php/XvMC:Example_CPU_Savings>

also seems to imply that I'll have enough raw hardware horsepower, if
perhaps little or none to spare.

> > Why, pray tell, would I not want to run XvMC?
>
> More or less broken for most people with high-definition recordings.

Can you expand on this, or at least point me to a more definitive
explanation of what you're talking about?

> > That is not the situation I'm dealing with. The new system will be
> > a Back-End ONLY. My understanding is that this reduces the host
> > system CPU/memory requirements *drastically*, as compared to a FE/BE
> > system.
>
> Memory, yes.
>
> CPU? Not so much. As noted, recording ATSC streams from a HDHomerun is
> very easy from a processing perspective.

Now it seems to be you who is contradicting himself.

As noted several times so far in this thread, "recording ATSC streams" is
*all* this box is destined to do. It will not be providing any sort of
MythTV "front-end" functions, and it will not be supporting NTSC recording
(except perhaps if I steal some of its disk space for the overflow from the
existing FE/BE box; but I don't really expect that to happen). So by your
won statement, that should make life VERY easy for that system's CPU. Now,
once I have it in place and see how well the existing FE/BE box deals with
the captured high-def recordings, I *may* then have the new Back-End also
do some sort of auto-transcoding (particularly if/when the existing FE/BE
moves to the MBR, where it will have to deal with a conventional NTSC 4:3
TV set). But I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

> No. It's a network device and backends communicate with it via the
> network. As noted, one HDHomerun is distinct from another from a
> network-topology perspective.

Yes, others have now mentioned this; and as a result, a pair of HDHRs is
now the leading contender of how I'll handle the tuner issue.

Thanks.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

jon.the.wise.gdrive at gmail

Nov 16, 2008, 6:13 PM

Post #25 of 38 (3964 views)
Permalink

Re: Time to take the next step... [In reply to]

> As noted, you are not in fact going to be able to play back actual
> 720p or 1080i MythTV recordings with your existing MythTV box,
> regardless of whether you take the backend load off it. A Pentium 4
> 3.0 GHz is the minimum.

This is incorrect. I am doing it just fine (uncompressed ATSC
recordings from all major networks) with a 2.8ghz P4 and a GeForce
4400MX.

>> Why, pray tell, would I not want to run XvMC?
>
> More or less broken for most people with high-definition recordings.

As I understand it, works fine with all but newer nvidia cards.
Different driver versions support it better than others as well.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users [at] mythtv
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

1 2

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads