Aran Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 12:38:36PM -0500, Tony Lill wrote: >> William Uther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > I really like Isaac's idea of using the original show priority. >> >> Bad, bad idea! Most of my priorities are set to get around >> deficiencies in the scheduler. I think I only have one based on the >> actual 'desirability' of the show. > > I guess I interpret priority as "how important is the show to me." > So, using it as a factor in determining what to delete when the disk > is full is perfectly natural. Also, using priority in the autoexpire > code is far less complex than all the other "solutions" proposed in > this thread.
Well, I look at the recording priority as a RECORDING priority. If you think a priority based autoexpire is best (I agree that it's nice and simple and behaves in a very deterministic manner), then perhaps a separate autoexpire proirity would be better. > Or, if you have issues that require monkey games with priority, try > adding another tuner card. Nothing solves scheduling conflicts like > another card! As long as you pay for the extra satellite reciever! -- Tony Lill, [EMAIL PROTECTED] President, A. J. Lill Consultants fax/data (519) 650 3571 539 Grand Valley Dr., Cambridge, Ont. N3H 2S2 (519) 241 2461 --------------- http://www.ajlc.waterloo.on.ca/ ---------------- "Welcome to All Things UNIX, where if it's not UNIX, it's CRAP!"
_______________________________________________ mythtv-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
