Chris Moffatt wrote: > Hi Derek, > > Regarding audio/video - you are correct that you can't logically tie a/v > devices across multiple machines, and I'd like to better understand the > scenario that this serves? We can however support multiple cameras per > computer. > <snip>
Hi Chris, In our case, this capability is very important for a couple of reasons. First is the basic reason that has been described already - spreading the load. Our theatre node drives 4 displays and has three captures. While I may be able to pull that off with one machine, why would I do that when I can easily split the tasks to two machines? This frees up the display machine to possibly do other tasks also (running remote visualization software etc) without getting bogged down. Secondly, I think you are correct that currently the main purpose is the ability to 'tie a/v devices across multiple machines'; however, the nice part about the servicemanager/services infrastructure is that it is completely extensible. It doesn't have to be about typical a/v at all. Instead of having an audioservice or a videoservice, imagine having a 3D visualization service - which may require the control of a specialized display or a specialized set of devices etc. With this infrastructure, we are capable of building our own specific services that are controlled easily and centrally. Just my $0.02... (Actually, that's Canadian dollars too, so its probably only worth about a $0.015 to you... ;-) ) Todd -- Collaboration & Visualization Technician WestGrid - www.westgrid.ca IRMACS - www.irmacs.com Ph. 604.268.6979 Todd Zimmerman - to...@sfu.ca
