On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 08:50:42 -0800 VDR User <user.vdr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Gavin Hamill <gdh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > My 2c... > > > > RAM is cheap - just add some RAM and use a memory-based filesystem like > > tmpfs? Then there would be no special handling required from VDR since > > the 'livebuffer' file is part of the directory tree like any other file. > > Not a bad idea really as long as nothing else needs ram. I recorded > 70mins worth of 1080i HDTV the other day and total size was about > 3.5G. 4GB is about $35-$40 for DDR2-800 so it's not too expensive. I > usually take advantage of mail-in-rebates so I've actually got a few > 2x2GB kits here that I haven't paid more then $20 for each and all my > boxes have at least 4GB in them already. > > Is it possible to resize the live buffer is another app needs more ram? For boxstar I was thinking of having the live buffer in RAM to save writing to the HD, and even wondered about having it in the player front-end instead of the server. Both approaches have their pros and cons. The beauty of virtual memory is that it works both ways. An application written to use a file can have the file cached in RAM and one written to use RAM can have it swapped to disc if the RAM is needed for something else. But I wonder, does writing to the HD really shorten its life significantly compared to constant spinning or frequently being spun up and down? -- TH * http://www.realh.co.uk _______________________________________________ vdr mailing list vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
