Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="morpheus_xx" data-source="post: 1291457" data-attributes="member: 48495">[USER=156902]@jfd553[/USER] can you help me with some checks in your environment? I have prepared three different builds for our cached streaming accessThe attached files need to be placed into folder C:\Program Files (x86)\Team MediaPortal\MP2-Client (client PC!)<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">MediaPortal.Common.[256kb_r2_c10](default).7z --&gt; Default configuration. 256kb chunk size, 2 read-ahead streams, 10 cached segments</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">MediaPortal.Common.[512kb_r1_c5] --&gt; TEST: 512kb chunk size, 1 read-ahead, 5 cached</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">MediaPortal.Common.[1024kb_r1_c2] --&gt; TEST: 1024kb chunk size, 1 read-ahead,&nbsp; 2 cached</li>
</ol>Please try build 1, 2, 3 after each other and compare the playback quality on client. I would expect the 3rd build to be smoothest, as the requests are loading bigger chunks.The reason for this approach was the random-access of files and folder structures on remote systems, i.e. if you have a DVD-Rip on harddisk that needs to be played back on client. Then happens a lot of read acccess to different files and positions, that's why we implemented this chunks / cache logic.If this brings an real improvement, I would add some settings so users can change this behavior.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="morpheus_xx, post: 1291457, member: 48495"] [USER=156902]@jfd553[/USER] can you help me with some checks in your environment? I have prepared three different builds for our cached streaming access The attached files need to be placed into folder C:\Program Files (x86)\Team MediaPortal\MP2-Client (client PC!) [LIST=1] [*]MediaPortal.Common.[256kb_r2_c10](default).7z --> Default configuration. 256kb chunk size, 2 read-ahead streams, 10 cached segments [*]MediaPortal.Common.[512kb_r1_c5] --> TEST: 512kb chunk size, 1 read-ahead, 5 cached [*]MediaPortal.Common.[1024kb_r1_c2] --> TEST: 1024kb chunk size, 1 read-ahead, 2 cached [/LIST] Please try build 1, 2, 3 after each other and compare the playback quality on client. I would expect the 3rd build to be smoothest, as the requests are loading bigger chunks. The reason for this approach was the random-access of files and folder structures on remote systems, i.e. if you have a DVD-Rip on harddisk that needs to be played back on client. Then happens a lot of read acccess to different files and positions, that's why we implemented this chunks / cache logic. If this brings an real improvement, I would add some settings so users can change this behavior. [/QUOTE]

Verification