home
products
contribute
download
documentation
forum
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
All posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
MediaPortal 1
Development
Improvement Suggestions
EPG grab improvement
Contact us
RSS
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="SciDoctor" data-source="post: 88840" data-attributes="member: 11346"><p>The method as is doesn't take in to account the possibilty that if the first channel on a MUX that is checked 'times out' that ALL channels on this MUX could be in a situation NOW to 'time out' .Thus checking them NOW would waste time .(you do revisit the next channel on a MUX the next cycle)</p><p></p><p>In a situation where a 'time out' occurs a move to start to grab the channels on the next MUX instead of repeatedly trying every channel on the original MUX would be benefical</p><p></p><p>This situation ocured this weekend as the power to two MUXs had been reduced rendering reception poor and the EPG data unavailable.</p><p></p><p>These two MUXs (A and B) contain thirty channels.</p><p></p><p>The EPG grabber spent 30x10 = 300mins trying every channel, getting a 'time out' on all and the EPG database recived no data .</p><p></p><p>Changing the grab order would have allowed a 'time out' on MUX A CH 1 and then 'time out' on MUX B CH 1 (only 20 mins wasted for no EPG) and then MUX C CH 1 where a succesful garb would have occured.</p><p></p><p>The difference 300 mins for no data or 30 mins and at least data for one channel (possibly more than one or all channels depending on broadcasters EPG data)</p><p></p><p>We both agree that in perfect no error conditons both grab orders will take about the same time.</p><p></p><p>Now the problem with not grabbing any channel because you received data within a previous grab on another channel doesn't take into account that the data recieved may not be complete.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SciDoctor, post: 88840, member: 11346"] The method as is doesn't take in to account the possibilty that if the first channel on a MUX that is checked 'times out' that ALL channels on this MUX could be in a situation NOW to 'time out' .Thus checking them NOW would waste time .(you do revisit the next channel on a MUX the next cycle) In a situation where a 'time out' occurs a move to start to grab the channels on the next MUX instead of repeatedly trying every channel on the original MUX would be benefical This situation ocured this weekend as the power to two MUXs had been reduced rendering reception poor and the EPG data unavailable. These two MUXs (A and B) contain thirty channels. The EPG grabber spent 30x10 = 300mins trying every channel, getting a 'time out' on all and the EPG database recived no data . Changing the grab order would have allowed a 'time out' on MUX A CH 1 and then 'time out' on MUX B CH 1 (only 20 mins wasted for no EPG) and then MUX C CH 1 where a succesful garb would have occured. The difference 300 mins for no data or 30 mins and at least data for one channel (possibly more than one or all channels depending on broadcasters EPG data) We both agree that in perfect no error conditons both grab orders will take about the same time. Now the problem with not grabbing any channel because you received data within a previous grab on another channel doesn't take into account that the data recieved may not be complete. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
MediaPortal 1
Development
Improvement Suggestions
EPG grab improvement
Contact us
RSS
Top
Bottom