On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 23:55 -0500, Mike Isely wrote: > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Roger > > > > I've performed manual scheduling using MythWIKI for the past year. It's > > much easier with the wiki page, after the initial learning curve. > > > > Feeling more comfortable the HVR-1950 should work here after acquiring > > this missing info concerning EIT & finding XvMC works extremely well > > (nullifying the system requirements. ;-) > > You DO realize you're debating an issue that amounts to a trivial > $20/year, right?
Yes. I also realize the *real* person bailing out the banks is me with my interest payments. Besides, I'm quite boring here in my old age & only watch the nightly news & PBS shows. :-) > > > > > > I was considering a HDHomeRun, but then would figure I would have to > > upgrade my entire network to gigabit and then, as I run Gentoo syncing > > to a local portage, would create hiccups on the local net causing frame > > jitters during recordings. Figure the pvrusb2/hvr-1950 will provide > > better stable recordings. > > You'll get the same quality of recording from either type of device. > > Two errors in logic here. > > First, you don't need a gigabit network to use an HDHomerun. I ran here > using 100BaseT for quite a long time without any problem. (I'm using > gigabit everywhere now but this wasn't the reason why.) If you're > really worried about this, stick a second NIC in your backend system and > use a crossover cable to direct-connect it to the HDHomeRun. With that > you'll have a private pipe to the tuner anyway. > > Second, the data from an HDHomeRun - just like from an HVR-1950 or any > pvrusb2-driven device - is a digital bit stream consisting of mpeg2 > data. These are not raw video frames and are thus not sensitive to > relative timing. This is an important difference because mpeg2 data is > internally self-timed. Jitter / non-deterministic packet delivery will > not harm the quality of the video stream at all. So long as the sending > side can buffer a second or two of data (should not be a problem) you > won't lose anything. And since the receiving end is a MythTV backend, > it's going to buffer up a few seconds there anyway. Hiccups should not > be a problem - unless your backend gets overloaded but that's the same > with a pvrusb2-driven device as well. > > The behavior of the bit stream from an HDHomeRun will be functionally > identical to what you get from a pvrusb2-driven device, i.e. in the end > it's just an mpeg stream. And a 100BaseT link should be fine. > > -Mike Thanks for putting some holes into my apparently logical thinking patterns. ;-) Didn't realize the HDHomeRun buffered packet transmittal. But I am constantly maxing-out my 100TX home LAN with local Gentoo Portage syncs. There's a good write-up in a forum on HDHomeRun packet transmittal rates. ie. 100Mbps for 100TX LAN, and one HDHomeRun only uses 20Mbps. I've also implemented nice & ionice into my Portage syncs to prevent overloads. (ie. ionice -c2 -n7 nice -n19 rsync) -- Roger http://rogerx.freeshell.org _______________________________________________ pvrusb2 mailing list [email protected] http://www.isely.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pvrusb2
