[mythtv-users] Recent "pixelation" or "glitches" in recordings (HDHR related?)

[Thomas Mashos]

On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Joseph Fry <joe at thefrys.com> wrote:

>
>   >> > I like the idea of an SSD drive for the recording drive. What is
>>>> the
>>>> >> > actual lifetime of these suckers anyway, if you made sure the only
>>>> >> > thing being sent to them was recordings?
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Joseph Fry <joe at thefrys.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >> >       If that's not possible, then I would consider getting a SSD
>>>> to act
>>>> >> > as your recording drive and create a user job (or cron) that runs
>>>> >> > after a few days that moves the recording to the raid array.
>>>>  Getting
>>>> >> > an SSD for my recording drive is my next investment... it would
>>>> allow
>>>> >> > my magnetic drives to be spun down most of the time to save on
>>>> >> > power/heat/noise.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I believe you both mean "system drive".  A SSD as a recording drive
>>>> would
>>>> >> truly be a waste.  Expensive/GB, meaning those HDHR shows will cost
>>>> a LOT
>>>> >> more to store.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >No, I meant recording drive.  But I clearly meant recording and not
>>>> >storage.
>>>> >
>>>> >I would estimate that about 80% of my recordings (to include live tv)
>>>> are
>>>> >watched and deleted within 1 week.  Using a 1 week delayed userjob or
>>>> >cronjob that moves files older than 1 week to magnetic storage would
>>>> allow
>>>> >me to use a smallish SSD as temporary storage of recordings/livetv.  A
>>>> >single SSD should be able to sustain enough throughput for all of my
>>>> >tuners, commflagging, and watching several shows.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >> If you're looking for opportunities to spin-down your magnetic
>>>> drives,
>>>> >> you'll use THOSE as recording drives.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >Using a SSD as described above would allow the drives to remain spun
>>>> down
>>>> >except when transferring recordings from the SSD, or watching one that
>>>> was
>>>> >already transferred.  Because the transfers would occur faster than
>>>> >recording directly and because only a fraction of all recordings would
>>>> >actually make it to the magnetic drives, they would remain spun down
>>>> far
>>>> >more.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, the storage drives in this scheme would be started more
>>>> often than you would like.  When mythfrontend displays a list of
>>>> programs, it makes a check for the presence of the recording's file
>>>> and displays an X icon for those it can not find.  That checking
>>>> process would start all the storage drives every time it happened as
>>>> all partitions in all storage groups are scanned to find files.  There
>>>> is no way the current operation of MythTV would allow just the drive
>>>> needed to play a specific recording to be started, as the actual
>>>> locations for the files are not stored in the database.
>>>
>>>
>>> Interesting, I had never heard that before.  Sounds like it would be
>>> worth lobbying to have changed, perhaps have it confirm they are available
>>> on some sort of schedule rather then every time the user opens the watch
>>> recordings screen.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mythtv-users mailing list
>>> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
>>> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Queue bug report "Mythfrontend said a recording was there, but when I
>> went to play it I received the error 'recording not available'"
>>
>>
> I think it would be reasonable for it to do the normal scan upon opening
> watch recordings, but only if the last scan was more than X hours ago OR if
> the last scan revealed missing files.
>
> I don't treat the red X icon as authoritative anyway...  anything can
> happen between the time that the scan runs and I try to play a video; hell
> I could leave the watch recordings screen open and go and take my storage
> drives off line and it won't show the red x but I will get an error when I
> try to play the file.
>
> The red x is simply an indicator that on the last check the file was
> missing... all I'm saying is that we shouldn't do so many checks.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>
>

Why should we do ANY check? I think it's reasonable to expect that

A) Users shouldn't be touching recording files outside of MythTV

B) Recording drives are relatively static in their location.

Thanks,

Thomas Mashos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20130424/be006bf7/attachment-0001.html>