Re: [vdr] aufs instead of mhddfs with vdr 2.1.2
The situation happens when the files / dirs are spread under separate branches,
for example when viewing recording and it creates resume file on different
branch. Maybe that could avoided with creating policies?
For a workaround, I made a simple reccmds script to rename the dir with mv
command.
It handles the situation where same dir exists in both branches by doing
copyup. Maybe some checking should be added that dir really exists.
#!/bin/bash
echo Renaming $1
mv $1 ${1%.rec}.del
echo touch .update
touch /video/.update
echo done
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] aufs instead of mhddfs with vdr 2.1.2
Hi Mike, If I understand your question correctly, you have several file systems for video data and you want to join them for use with VDR. VDR supports this out of the box: If your video directory ends with '0', VDR will automatically look for directories ending with 1, 2, ... and will use all of them. So you could mount your filesystems to directories that correspond to the naming scheme. You can find a more detailed description at: http://www.vdr-wiki.de/wiki/index.php/VDR_Optionen Another option is to join your disks to a RAID0 (or RAID10, RAID5, RAID6, if you are worried about data loss because of HD failure). HTH, Matthias On 11/30/2013 02:28 PM, Mike Constabel wrote: Hi Klaus, i tried mhddfs since I've 5 disks with together 8 TB. The problem is that mhddfs didn't run reliable for me. I tried Debian Wheezy with kernel 3.2, 3.6, 3.10, but every time after starting an recording I got vdr: [19801] ERROR (tools.c,423): /video1: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden/var/log/syslog.6.gz:Nov 24 19:54:38 video1 vdr: [20399] ERROR (recording.c,856): /video1/Spielfilm/Romantik~Liebe/Ein_verlockendes_Spiel/2011-12-11.20.05.8-0.rec/info: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden vdr: [20399] ERROR (recording.c,914): /video1/Spielfilm/Romantik~Liebe/Ein_verlockendes_Spiel/2011-12-11.20.05.8-0.rec/summary.vdr: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden vdr: [20399] ERROR (tools.c,613): /video1/Spielfilm/Romantik~Liebe/Ein_verlockendes_Spiel/2011-12-11.20.05.8-0.rec: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden vdr: [20431] ERROR (recorder.c,159): /video1/Doku/Natur/Terra_X:_Faszination_Erde_-_mit_Dirk_Steffens/Teil_:_Wildes_Mittelmeer_-_Wiege_Europas/2013-11-24.19.28.51-0.rec/1.ts: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden vdr: [20397] ERROR (tools.c,423): /video1: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden So I tried aufs. This works nearly great for me. mount -t aufs -o br=/video1.1=rw:/video1.2=rw:/video1.3=rw:/video1.4=rw:/video1.0=rw -o create=mfsrr:$((10*1024*1024*1024)):30 -o udba=reval,sum,verbose none /video1 But now I cannot delete recordings from within vdr. I found something about this: http://aufs.sourceforge.net/aufs.html#Incompatible%20with%20an%20Ordinary%20Filesystem To rename(2) directory may return EXDEV even if both of src and tgt are on the same aufs. When the rename-src dir exists on multiple branches and the lower dir has child(ren), aufs has to copyup all his children. It can be recursive copyup. Current aufs does not support such huge copyup operation at one time in kernel space, instead produces a warning and returns EXDEV. Generally, mv(1) detects this error and tries mkdir(2) and rename(2) or copy/unlink recursively. So the result is harmless. If your application which issues rename(2) for a directory does not support EXDEV, it will not work on aufs. Also this specification is applied to the case when the src directory exists on the lower readonly branch and it has child(ren). Is it possible that vdr supports aufs? aufs would be better than mhddfs: faster, not fuse, in kernel, under development... Regards, Mike ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] aufs instead of mhddfs with vdr 2.1.2
On 01.12.2013 11:24, Matthias Biel wrote: Hi Mike, If I understand your question correctly, you have several file systems for video data and you want to join them for use with VDR. VDR supports this out of the box: If your video directory ends with '0', VDR will automatically look for directories ending with 1, 2, ... and will use all of them. So you could mount your filesystems to directories that correspond to the naming scheme. You can find a more detailed description at: http://www.vdr-wiki.de/wiki/index.php/VDR_Optionen He's using VDR 2.1.2, which doesn't distribute recordings over several disks any more. There is now a plugin interface through which one could implement that feature again, but I wanted to get this out of the core VDR code. It was a makeshift solution in times where disk sizes were still relatively small. Nowadays we have disk sizes in the terabyte range, which should be enough for a VDR. If aufs has problems renaming files, that's something that should be fixed or worked around elsewhere. I wouldn't want to implement yet another makeshift solution in VDR for this. Another option is to join your disks to a RAID0 (or RAID10, RAID5, RAID6, if you are worried about data loss because of HD failure). I'm using two 1TB disks in a RAID-1 configuration, which has already proven very useful when one of the disks failed. Klaus On 11/30/2013 02:28 PM, Mike Constabel wrote: Hi Klaus, i tried mhddfs since I've 5 disks with together 8 TB. The problem is that mhddfs didn't run reliable for me. I tried Debian Wheezy with kernel 3.2, 3.6, 3.10, but every time after starting an recording I got vdr: [19801] ERROR (tools.c,423): /video1: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden/var/log/syslog.6.gz:Nov 24 19:54:38 video1 vdr: [20399] ERROR (recording.c,856): /video1/Spielfilm/Romantik~Liebe/Ein_verlockendes_Spiel/2011-12-11.20.05.8-0.rec/info: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden vdr: [20399] ERROR (recording.c,914): /video1/Spielfilm/Romantik~Liebe/Ein_verlockendes_Spiel/2011-12-11.20.05.8-0.rec/summary.vdr: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden vdr: [20399] ERROR (tools.c,613): /video1/Spielfilm/Romantik~Liebe/Ein_verlockendes_Spiel/2011-12-11.20.05.8-0.rec: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden vdr: [20431] ERROR (recorder.c,159): /video1/Doku/Natur/Terra_X:_Faszination_Erde_-_mit_Dirk_Steffens/Teil_:_Wildes_Mittelmeer_-_Wiege_Europas/2013-11-24.19.28.51-0.rec/1.ts: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden vdr: [20397] ERROR (tools.c,423): /video1: Der Socket ist nicht verbunden So I tried aufs. This works nearly great for me. mount -t aufs -o br=/video1.1=rw:/video1.2=rw:/video1.3=rw:/video1.4=rw:/video1.0=rw -o create=mfsrr:$((10*1024*1024*1024)):30 -o udba=reval,sum,verbose none /video1 But now I cannot delete recordings from within vdr. I found something about this: http://aufs.sourceforge.net/aufs.html#Incompatible%20with%20an%20Ordinary%20Filesystem To rename(2) directory may return EXDEV even if both of src and tgt are on the same aufs. When the rename-src dir exists on multiple branches and the lower dir has child(ren), aufs has to copyup all his children. It can be recursive copyup. Current aufs does not support such huge copyup operation at one time in kernel space, instead produces a warning and returns EXDEV. Generally, mv(1) detects this error and tries mkdir(2) and rename(2) or copy/unlink recursively. So the result is harmless. If your application which issues rename(2) for a directory does not support EXDEV, it will not work on aufs. Also this specification is applied to the case when the src directory exists on the lower readonly branch and it has child(ren). Is it possible that vdr supports aufs? aufs would be better than mhddfs: faster, not fuse, in kernel, under development... Regards, Mike ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] aufs instead of mhddfs with vdr 2.1.2
Am 01.12.2013 11:24, schrieb Matthias Biel: Hi Mike, If I understand your question correctly, you have several file systems for video data and you want to join them for use with VDR. VDR supports this out of the box: If your video directory ends with '0', VDR will automatically look for directories ending with 1, 2, ... and will use all of them. So you could mount your filesystems to directories that correspond to the naming scheme. You can find a more detailed description at: http://www.vdr-wiki.de/wiki/index.php/VDR_Optionen This is true, but the current vdr developer version doesn't support this anymore. So why not look for new solutions? Gerald !DSPAM:529b13a3216559371165570! ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] aufs instead of mhddfs with vdr 2.1.2
Am Sonntag, 1. Dezember 2013, 11:44:42 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger: I wanted to get this out of the core VDR code. It was a makeshift solution in times where disk sizes were still relatively small. Nowadays we have disk sizes in the terabyte range, which should be enough for a VDR. It is certainly not enough for me, and I will never run VDR without being able to spread directories over disks. I always have several disks, right now 4 of them. When the capacity of modern disks sharply increases, I remove my oldest disk or the one most aged (smartctl) and add a new one. Over the years, this has proven to be very simple and reliable. Your removal of functionality makes that impossible. IMHO, RAID is not practical for that situation, and I do not really trust RAID and probably never will. something like aufs should make it much easier to use VDR video data over network file systems, even by non-vdr software. A vdr plugin enabling more than one file system would not be adequate, it would still lock users with more than one video disk into having to use vdr or vdr-specific plugins on all clients even if all they want to do is just viewing recordings. The clients needs a unified view over all vdr video directories. and of course such a plugin is reinventing the wheel with all those unionfs variants around. -- Wolfgang ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] aufs instead of mhddfs with vdr 2.1.2
On 01.12.2013 15:54, Wolfgang Rohdewald wrote: Am Sonntag, 1. Dezember 2013, 11:44:42 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger: I wanted to get this out of the core VDR code. It was a makeshift solution in times where disk sizes were still relatively small. Nowadays we have disk sizes in the terabyte range, which should be enough for a VDR. It is certainly not enough for me, and I will never run VDR without being able to spread directories over disks. I always have several disks, right now 4 of them. When the capacity of modern disks sharply increases, I remove my oldest disk or the one most aged (smartctl) and add a new one. Over the years, this has proven to be very simple and reliable. Your removal of functionality makes that impossible. All I did was to remove the functionality from the core VDR code and provide a plugin interface that can be used to re-implement it. I'm pretty sure somebody will write such a plugin (and it will probably have tons of setup parameters, bells and whistles ;-). Klaus ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] aufs instead of mhddfs with vdr 2.1.2
Depending on your personal ordering sheme a simple link could do. I use multiple disk just by having a directory Other disks on my main vdr disk with links to the other disks containing archived recordings. I do make sure that the main disk always has enough free space (which is really no big deal with a 3TB disk). I once did use that old functionality of vdr doing the distribuition, but really don't miss it. Much simpler now. Greetings (and a very big thanks to Klaus. I am a very happy vdr user since the very first days - missed a one diget user number just because i ignored your mail while on leave for a holiday ;-) Michael On 01.12.2013 17:02, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: On 01.12.2013 15:54, Wolfgang Rohdewald wrote: Am Sonntag, 1. Dezember 2013, 11:44:42 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger: I wanted to get this out of the core VDR code. It was a makeshift solution in times where disk sizes were still relatively small. Nowadays we have disk sizes in the terabyte range, which should be enough for a VDR. It is certainly not enough for me, and I will never run VDR without being able to spread directories over disks. I always have several disks, right now 4 of them. When the capacity of modern disks sharply increases, I remove my oldest disk or the one most aged (smartctl) and add a new one. Over the years, this has proven to be very simple and reliable. Your removal of functionality makes that impossible. All I did was to remove the functionality from the core VDR code and provide a plugin interface that can be used to re-implement it. I'm pretty sure somebody will write such a plugin (and it will probably have tons of setup parameters, bells and whistles ;-). Klaus ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
