Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Roberdin" data-source="post: 96715" data-attributes="member: 17517">Perhaps your method would work, but I don't think it is particularly desirable. If Client A schedules a recording, then under your scheme, both Client A and the server would have to be running to carry out that recording (because Client A would 'tune' to Server A and begin recording). And if Client B wants to watch something else at the same time, it will not know that there are no free cards on the server. Furthermore if Client C wants to watch a recording made by Client A then it can't, because it is stored on a different computer.Also, changing the configuration of the server (say, channels) will need you to change all client settings to re-add those channels. Essentially, your system would seem to have unnecessary duplication of data which should be centralised.Now, if you centralise the recording system, the EPG system, et c. then you've basically got what you have now.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Roberdin, post: 96715, member: 17517"] Perhaps your method would work, but I don't think it is particularly desirable. If Client A schedules a recording, then under your scheme, both Client A and the server would have to be running to carry out that recording (because Client A would 'tune' to Server A and begin recording). And if Client B wants to watch something else at the same time, it will not know that there are no free cards on the server. Furthermore if Client C wants to watch a recording made by Client A then it can't, because it is stored on a different computer. Also, changing the configuration of the server (say, channels) will need you to change all client settings to re-add those channels. Essentially, your system would seem to have unnecessary duplication of data which should be centralised. Now, if you centralise the recording system, the EPG system, et c. then you've basically got what you have now. [/QUOTE]

Verification