Send Motion-user mailing list submissions to
motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
motion-user-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
motion-user-ow...@lists.sourceforge.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Motion-user digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Motion 4.2.2 vs 4.1.1 CPU usage (Ruslan Matveev)
2. Re: Motion 4.2.2 vs 4.1.1 CPU usage (tosiara)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 23:49:44 +0300
From: Ruslan Matveev <matveev.rus...@gmail.com>
To: Motion discussion list <motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Motion 4.2.2 vs 4.1.1 CPU usage
Message-ID:
<CABqvc7s2=omu5+itqvwm6ns4rxkrzxampyaqt9fgqjzohz7...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I cant say anything about 4.1.1 sorry, but I can explain how passtrough can
reduce cpu usage. With passtrough enabled, you specify two streams, one is
gonna be used for motion detection (thats the one, who's resolution can
safely be reduced), and second one for producing movies (resolution kept as
it is). Now, motion connects to both streams, but decoding only low res
stream and using it for detecting the motion. When there is a motion
detected in low res stream, it starts to copy high res stream data -
directly into the file (without decoding it).
I do not have 5 cams, but one that I have consumes only 18 percent of cpu
(that includes whole thing, os itself, mysql server, nodejs proxy).
Before enabling passtrough, it was about 70%.
??, 18 ???. 2019 ?., 23:41 rmbusy <rmbusy+mot...@gmail.com>:
> Since this setup worked on 4.1.1, I don't want to reduce the resolution
> just to get 4.2.2 to work. I'll go back to 4.1.1 before I do that. How
> would movie_passthough help reduce CPU usage? Or is that just when viewing
> on the web page? Since only 3 cameras are streaming, it seems like they
> would be the only ones to benefit.
>
> I started building 4.1.1 from source, but ran into some FFMPEG build
> problems. I need to go back to it, so I can do a real apples to apples
> comparison. I was hoping someone could say definitively that CPU usage
> went up with 4.2.2 over 4.1.1, or it did not.
>
>
> --
> Rob.
>
>
> On 7/18/19 11:45 AM, Ruslan Matveev wrote:
>
> Try to do it ;) And also decrease motion stream resolution, it will do the
> trick.
>
> ??, 18 ???. 2019 ?., 21:42 rmbusy <rmbusy+mot...@gmail.com>:
>
>> I didn't enable it, and it says it defaults to disabled, so it appears I
>> do not.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rob.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/18/19 11:35 AM, Ruslan Matveev wrote:
>>
>> Do you have passtrough on?
>>
>> ??, 18 ???. 2019 ?., 21:33 rmbusy <rmbusy+mot...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> I upgraded my system to the latest version of Linux, and at the same
>>> time, upgraded Motion from 4.1.1 to 4.2.2.
>>>
>>> I have 8 RTSP cameras set up, 5 cameras configured for snapshot mode at
>>> 1 frame per second (all 2MP), and 3 streaming at 5 frames per second (2
>>> 2MP, 1 1MP). All of this is running on a quad core Rock64 w/ 4GB DRAM,
>>> at the default CPU frequency (1.3GHz).
>>>
>>> With 4.1.1, I was seeing around 150% CPU utilization (via top), and when
>>> connecting to the web page, around 300% CPU utilization. Since the
>>> Rock64 is a quad core ARM processor, max is 400%.
>>>
>>> Now with 4.2.2 and the same camera configuration files (updated with new
>>> option names), I'm seeing CPU utilization of 250%, and when connecting
>>> to the web page, the numbers are maxed out, and the web page is
>>> basically non-responsive.
>>>
>>> Since I upgraded the underlying OS, I can't rule out that it's requiring
>>> more CPU cycles for Motion to do the same thing, but that seems
>>> unlikely. Running top doesn't show anything else using CPU cycles
>>> (other than top).
>>>
>>> Can anyone confirm if 4.2.2 is using significantly more CPU cycles than
>>> 4.1.1? If I can't find a way to reduce the usage, I may have to go back
>>> to 4.1.1.
>>>
>>> Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rob.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Motion-user mailing list
>>> Motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>>> https://motion-project.github.io/
>>>
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Motion-user mailing
>> listMotion-user@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-userhttps://motion-project.github.io/
>>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Motion-user mailing list
>> Motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>> https://motion-project.github.io/
>>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Motion-user mailing
> listMotion-user@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-userhttps://motion-project.github.io/
>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Motion-user mailing list
> Motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
> https://motion-project.github.io/
>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 09:12:13 +0300
From: tosiara <tosi...@gmail.com>
To: Motion discussion list <motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Motion 4.2.2 vs 4.1.1 CPU usage
Message-ID:
<CACHTdwQ6GHF7REE=_fNA9+g=uumzpvc3w53u59+hzhozwyl...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Could you compare CPU numbers running only one camera? The best to
make 8 separate tests with each camera. This could help to understand
the issue better
Also, which OS are were you using before and now, and which motion
version - binary package or compiled yourself?
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 9:33 PM rmbusy <rmbusy+mot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I upgraded my system to the latest version of Linux, and at the same
> time, upgraded Motion from 4.1.1 to 4.2.2.
>
> I have 8 RTSP cameras set up, 5 cameras configured for snapshot mode at
> 1 frame per second (all 2MP), and 3 streaming at 5 frames per second (2
> 2MP, 1 1MP). All of this is running on a quad core Rock64 w/ 4GB DRAM,
> at the default CPU frequency (1.3GHz).
>
> With 4.1.1, I was seeing around 150% CPU utilization (via top), and when
> connecting to the web page, around 300% CPU utilization. Since the
> Rock64 is a quad core ARM processor, max is 400%.
>
> Now with 4.2.2 and the same camera configuration files (updated with new
> option names), I'm seeing CPU utilization of 250%, and when connecting
> to the web page, the numbers are maxed out, and the web page is
> basically non-responsive.
>
> Since I upgraded the underlying OS, I can't rule out that it's requiring
> more CPU cycles for Motion to do the same thing, but that seems
> unlikely. Running top doesn't show anything else using CPU cycles
> (other than top).
>
> Can anyone confirm if 4.2.2 is using significantly more CPU cycles than
> 4.1.1? If I can't find a way to reduce the usage, I may have to go back
> to 4.1.1.
>
> Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>
>
> --
> Rob.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Motion-user mailing list
> Motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
> https://motion-project.github.io/
>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
------------------------------
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Motion-user mailing list
Motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
------------------------------
End of Motion-user Digest, Vol 157, Issue 21
********************************************
