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 (Tom Kennelly)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 14:16:08 -0400
From: Tom Kennelly <t...@tekennelly.gotdns.com>
To: Motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Motion 4.2.2 vs 4.1.1 CPU usage
Message-ID:
<1ef875f6-7153-27bf-5658-230722459...@tekennelly.gotdns.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
BTW any mismatch between the camera configuration (i.e., width and
height sizes) and motion can increase CPU requirements.?? I also match
the framerates as well.
On 7/19/2019 2:11 PM, rmbusy wrote:
> Thanks for this info.? It sounds like 4.2.2 should be less CPU usage
> than 4.1.1, so I'll have to do some experimenting here to see if I can
> figure out why it's gone up (the profiling link should help with
> that).? I have all the notes from when I built 4.1.1. initially, and
> the source zip files, so I should be able to reproduce that if need be.
>
> I would not expect going from Ubuntu 16.04 to 18.04 to be the cause,
> but I won't rule it out either.? I have a spare drive, so I could
> install 16.04 on it, and in theory, completely recreate my original
> setup.? If only I had the free time to do everything I want to do
> right now.
>
> I'll keep you posted.
>
>
> --
> Rob.
>
>
>
> On 7/19/19 10:35 AM, tosiara wrote:
>> This is my ARM board CPU usage over the previous year:
>>
>> image.png
>>
>> It is using USB webcam. In 2018 I changed pixel format from MJPEG to
>> RAW and it decreased the CPU usage from ~65% to ~35%. In the middle
>> on 2018 I merged NEON optimizations which saved even more CPU - to
>> ~23%. I constantly update my motion to master branch, but since 2018
>> CPU usage on this ARM device has not changed
>>
>> So I doubt your issue is in motion's code. It could be compile flags.
>> If want to be sure, try profiling motion and compare:
>> http://www.lavrsen.dk/foswiki/bin/view/Motion/MotionProfiling
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 7:16 PM rmbusy <rmbusy+mot...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:rmbusy%2bmot...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> One other thing, in an attempt to reduce CPU usage, I've disabled
>> auto_tune, and added mask files to 5 of the cameras to mask out
>> foliage
>> and areas that could cause excess triggering, and bumped the
>> threshold
>> from 5,000 to 10,000 on all of the 2MP cameras.? These changes
>> were not
>> needed with 4.1.1.
>>
>> I've also noticed a lot more motion detection of changing shadows,
>> compared to what I used to see.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rob.
>>
>>
>> On 7/19/19 9:08 AM, rmbusy wrote:
>> > OS is Linux (before, Ubuntu Xenial 16.04 LTS, now Ubuntu Bionic
>> > 18.04.2 LTS).? In both cases, I built motion from source.? I
>> started
>> > by installing the package with apt-get install motion to get
>> all the
>> > dependencies, then built from source and switched to it.
>> >
>> > Since there are really only 3 types / configurations of cameras, I
>> > only tested the 3 types.? I watched the output of 'top' for
>> about a
>> > minute for each test.? I also waited for the initial startup to
>> settle
>> > (time for camera to respond with images) before recording the
>> > numbers.? I don't have 4.1.1 building yet, so these numbers are
>> for
>> > 4.2.2.
>> >
>> > For the 2MP snapshot camera, after startup, before connecting
>> to the
>> > web page, it hovered between 25% and 45% CPU usage.
>> > After starting the web page, the numbers hovered between 78.5%
>> and 81.5%.
>> >
>> > For the 1MP streaming camera (5 frames / sec), it hovered
>> between 23%
>> > and 33%.
>> > After starting the web page, 33.7% to 45.9%.
>> >
>> > For the 2MP streaming camera (5 frames / sec), it hovered
>> between 42%
>> > and 53.6%.
>> > After starting the web page, 63.6% and 70.3%.
>> >
>> > I'm a little surprised no one had usage numbers between the two
>> > versions.? Considering I'm using the same configuration files
>> (with
>> > updates for the new parameter names in 4.2), I was expecting
>> others
>> > would see this problem.? It's an issue for me, because I have more
>> > cameras I want to add, but at this point with 4.2.2, the CPU is
>> maxed
>> > out.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Rob.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 7/18/19 11:12 PM, tosiara wrote:
>> >> 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 <mailto:rmbusy%2bmot...@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
>> <mailto: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 list
>> >> Motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>> <mailto: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 list
>> Motion-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>> <mailto: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 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 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...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 17360 bytes
Desc: not available
------------------------------
------------------------------
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 25
********************************************
