On 7 November 2010 15:05, Klaus Schmidinger <Klaus.Schmidinger@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> It'd be preferable if recordings kept a unique number, that didn't >> change when every time a recording gets deleted, or a new recording is >> started. > > While this sounds feasible, it would also mean that the numbers > would get larger and larger over time if VDR runs like 24/7. > If this doesn't pose a problem to anybody, I could change this > so that every recording an instance of VDR "sees" would get a > unique number, by incrementing a static counter. These numbers would, > of course, only be valid within one instance of VDR, and only as long > as it actually runs. Once it restarts, the numbers would be reassigned > starting at 1. The only question remaining would probably be what to > do when the counter wraps over the integer boundary ;-) This sounds like the behaviour I previously expected and I don't see any problem with larger numbers. Potentially the recordings and timers could all be renumbered to start consecutively at zero on some regular schedule (e.g., daily), or via some SVDRP call, (similar to what would happen in the event of a restart) just as long as they don't change on every new timer or recording. As numbering sequentially would cause recordings to be numbered in order of date/time, presumably the re-numbering that happened on restart of VDR should also be changed to number them based on date/time rather than alphabetical order? Cheers, Dom _______________________________________________ vdr mailing list vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
