In conclusion as far as I understand the possibilities the best solution at
the moment is using a network storage solution in combination with shares.
Maybe also in combination with a pooling system (a popular video is
distributed to more disks for load balancing).

How does a hardware load balancer handle this? Do you have multiple disks
with the same content?

On 6/19/07, Dan Rossi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Steve speaking of caches when will that be put back in. What is the most
stable solution there, it really didnt go so well back in november :)


Gong wrote:
> Martijn,
>
> On 6/19/07, *Martijn van Beek* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>     To everybody who has network issues with the link I posted. Please
>     give me details like: browser, flash player version, firewalls,
>     etc. Network failures aren't logged if you can't reach the server.
>
>     Mark, the problem is the I/O that's why I'm posting this. But I'm
>     glad that FMS has the same problem ;).
>
>
> I guess that you are referring to FMS without clustering. The
> Edge/Origin solution of FMS provides a cache system on Edge so that
> the VOD can be directly distributed to clients on Edge, thus alleviate
> the load from Storage server accessed by Origin.
>
>     The only solution I can think about is the creation of a system
>     which divides the load over multiple disks/systems. Expensive but
>     effective.
>
>
>     On 6/19/07, *Mark de Jong [NetMasters BV]* <
>     [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>         Hi Martijn,
>
>         Be sure to check out the I/O of the server. We've had the same
>         issues on a
>         edge-server (yes, edge/origin) from a client from us and I/O
>         was the
>         bottleneck for this. They have a lot of seeking (and hundreds
>         of files) and
>         it was VERY I/O intensive. I don't now how Red5 handles this
>         but it is worth
>         checking this out first before going on to next steps.
>
>         Kind regards,
>
>         Mark de Jong
>
>         ________________________________
>
>         Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [mailto:
>         [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
Namens
>         Martijn van Beek
>         Verzonden: maandag 18 juni 2007 10:32
>         Aan: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>         Onderwerp: Re: [Red5] Load balancing for live streams
>
>
>         I'm not streaming live data but stored flv movies. And the
>         problem then
>         appears when a lot of people access the file at the same time
>         but all at a
>         different position (in time).
>
>
>         On 6/17/07, Steven Gong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>                 Orion,
>
>
>                 On 6/17/07, Orion Letizi < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>         <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >
>         wrote:
>
>
>                         While it may be impractical to cluster the
>         actual AV data in
>         the stream,
>                         perhaps the current state (metadata) of the
>         stream could be
>         clustered so
>                         that, as long as the AV data was available on
>         disk at each
>         server, any
>                         server could pick up the stream and start
>         serving it based
>         on the metadata
>                         about the stream (e.g., offset into the data
>         file, current
>         position of
>                         buffers, stuff like that).
>
>
>                 Yep, that's true if the VOD streaming is pulled by the
>         client. But
>         as we also need to track the client buffer, we are using a
>         scheduled task to
>         push the VOD content to the client.
>
>                 I was thinking of sharing the connection buffer across
>         the cluster
>         if the connection is of type RTMPTConnection. When the
>         connection is of type
>         RTMPT, we use a buffer for each connection to save the packets
>         that will be
>         sent to the client. These packets includes AV packets, RSO
>         packets,
>         invocation result etc. When the client's request is
>         distributed to one of
>         the node, the server retrieves packets in the buffer and sends
>         to the
>         client. So all kinds of services, regardless of VOD, Live or
>         RSO, can be
>         shared without the need to share the whole connection or
>         stream objects.
>
>                 What do you think?
>
>
>
>
>                         Of course, I share Steve Harris's lack of
>         knowledge of the
>         internals of
>                         Red5, so my observation might be dumb,
>         nonsensical, or both
>         for which I
>                         apologize in advance.
>
>
>                         Steve,
>
>                         On 6/16/07, sharrissf <
>         [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>         <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>  > wrote:
>                         >
>                         >
>                         > Assuming the stream fits in memory and just
>         has multiple
>         people accessing
>                         > it
>                         > I suspect it could be clustered with
>         Terracotta. Though I
>         would need to
>                         > know
>                         > more details to know for sure as I'm not
>         that familiar
>         with how they work
>                         > and are implemented. My thinking is that
>         everyone in this
>         case is
>                         > essentially sharing the same stream so
>         really only one
>         instance ends up in
>                         > each jvm and all the meta-data associated
>         with each user
>         is only in the
>                         > jvm
>                         > where the person is connected.
>
>
>                         The live stream is pushed to the subscribers
>         just like what
>         Remote
>                         SharedObject does so if configured properly I
>         believe it can
>         be clustered by
>                         TC. But I doubt that this is practically
>         realistic because
>                         (1) The amount of AV data is much bigger than
>         that of RSO.
>         So much more data
>                         will be transfered across the nodes.
>                         (2) When the amount of data arises, the
>         transfer latency
>         will also arise and
>                         the real time requirement of live streaming is
>         compromised.
>
>                         Anyway we can implement it technically and
>         whether it's
>         practical will be
>                         decided by the application.
>
>                         --
>                         View this message in context:
>
http://www.nabble.com/Load-balancing-for-live-streams-tf3926799.html#a111556
>         <
http://www.nabble.com/Load-balancing-for-live-streams-tf3926799.html#a111556
>
>         12
>                         Sent from the Red5 - English mailing list
>         archive at
>         Nabble.com <http://Nabble.com>.
>
>
>                         _______________________________________________
>                         Red5 mailing list
>                         [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>
>
>
>
>
>                 --
>                 I cannot tell why this heart languishes in silence. It
>         is for small
>         needs it never asks, or knows or remembers.  -- Tagore
>
>                 Best Regards
>                 Steven Gong
>
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 Red5 mailing list
>                  [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>                 http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Red5 mailing list
>         [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>         http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Red5 mailing list
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> I cannot tell why this heart languishes in silence. It is for small
> needs it never asks, or knows or remembers.  -- Tagore
>
> Best Regards
> Steven Gong
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Red5 mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>


_______________________________________________
Red5 mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org

_______________________________________________
Red5 mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org

Reply via email to