Kartsa schrieb: > Stefan Huelswitt kirjoitti: > >> On 01 Feb 2007 Reinhard Nissl <rnissl@xxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Heikki Manninen wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>> I've noticed that earlier when I was using PIII 550 MHz and vdr >>>>> 1.3.22 (or something about) I made a test by recording nine >>>>> channels simultaneously and watching a recording at the same time. >>>>> I remember there seemed to be no trouble doing it. Now when I have >>>>> vdr 1.4.4 after fourth recording starts vdr becomes sluggish and >>>>> there starts to come errors on log: >>>>> dvb-ttpci: warning: timeout waiting in LoadBitmap >>>>> when pushing menu button. And ofcourse no menu appears or menu >>>>> appears only partly. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Exactly the same thing here and with the latest and the second latest >>>> firmware. My FF 2.1 TT card starts to die after third simultaneous >>>> recording. But then again, I think that budget cards are much >>>> better in >>>> this area. >>>> >>> >>> Most likely, it's me who has to be blamed. Around 1.3.27, >>> cVideoRepacker >>> was introduced which has an impact on CPU load. This could be a reason >>> why the menu is slow when running several recordings at the same time. >>> >> >> >> I don't think that the problem is related to anything on VDR >> side. >> >> AFAIK the bandwidth from ARM to PCI bus is very limited on >> full-featured cards. With 3 recordings being transfered to VDR >> there is simply not enough bandwidth left for the OSD transfers. >> Hence the LoadBitmap timeout. >> >> I experience the problem since VDR introduced concurrent >> recordings and I cannot believe that there is any VDR / firmware >> combination which doesn't show this behaviour as it's IMO a >> hardware limitation. >> >> Budget cards doesn't have this limitation, they can transfer the >> full transponder without problems. >> > > I know the performance was better when I was using vdr-1.3.22. I know > I had 9 recordings going on and still I was able to watch a previous > recording and I was using a slower cpu and a ff card. Ofcourse my > recent test does prove your point, hence the question "what is the > best combination of hw and sw?". > Guess the best would be if you could/would be able to limit the possible number of recordings on a single card (or one would be able to set a limit for FF Cards or a fixed limit would be set in VDR at compile time) Then you could have a combination of FF and budget cards like most here have most likely.
