Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CyberSimian" data-source="post: 1141301" data-attributes="member: 141969">The tuner-card/slot relationship is useful information, but probably only in a relatively small number of cases.If a tuner develops a fault (resulting in failed recordings or no live TV on that tuner), one needs MP to log a message somewhere identifying the tuner that failed.&nbsp; This is what WMC does -- it has a &quot;History&quot; panel that logs each recording made, and (for failed recordings) the tuner that failed, and (where possible) the nature of the failure.&nbsp; MP currently lacks a History panel. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite3" alt=":(" title="Frown&nbsp; &nbsp; :(" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":(" />The &quot;History&quot; panel would need to identify the tuner unambiguously (e.g. &quot;tuner 7&quot; in &quot;TV Server Config&quot;), and then the user needs some way of mapping that to a PCI slot, PCI Express slot, USB tuner, or network tuner.&nbsp; This is a problem only when there are two or more identical cards/sticks/network-devices.Anthony's case is different because, to be useful, MP's tuner labelling algorithm would need to be identical to WMC's labelling algorithm, so that he could allocate easily different tuners to each media center.&nbsp; But that precludes MP being identical to the labelling algorithm used by other media centers (although in fairness WMC is probably the most important &quot;other media center&quot; to be compatible with <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big Grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" />).If identical cards/sticks/network-tuners are labelled &quot;Card 1&quot;, &quot;Card 2&quot;, etc, there is no obvious indication which card is in which slot.&nbsp; Are the cards numbered from top to bottom, or bottom to top?Identifying the slot for each card would be useful, but I can see that there are difficulties.&nbsp; And it is hard to grade this as anything other than a low priority enhancement. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite26" alt=":unsure:" title="Unsure&nbsp; &nbsp; :unsure:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":unsure:" />-- from CyberSimian in the UK</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CyberSimian, post: 1141301, member: 141969"] The tuner-card/slot relationship is useful information, but probably only in a relatively small number of cases. If a tuner develops a fault (resulting in failed recordings or no live TV on that tuner), one needs MP to log a message somewhere identifying the tuner that failed. This is what WMC does -- it has a "History" panel that logs each recording made, and (for failed recordings) the tuner that failed, and (where possible) the nature of the failure. MP currently lacks a History panel. :( The "History" panel would need to identify the tuner unambiguously (e.g. "tuner 7" in "TV Server Config"), and then the user needs some way of mapping that to a PCI slot, PCI Express slot, USB tuner, or network tuner. This is a problem only when there are two or more identical cards/sticks/network-devices. Anthony's case is different because, to be useful, MP's tuner labelling algorithm would need to be identical to WMC's labelling algorithm, so that he could allocate easily different tuners to each media center. But that precludes MP being identical to the labelling algorithm used by other media centers (although in fairness WMC is probably the most important "other media center" to be compatible with :D). If identical cards/sticks/network-tuners are labelled "Card 1", "Card 2", etc, there is no obvious indication which card is in which slot. Are the cards numbered from top to bottom, or bottom to top? Identifying the slot for each card would be useful, but I can see that there are difficulties. And it is hard to grade this as anything other than a low priority enhancement. :unsure: -- from CyberSimian in the UK [/QUOTE]

Verification