| LinHES Forums http://forums.linhes.org/ |
|
| Question about Myth, storage and multiple BEs http://forums.linhes.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=14965 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Too Many Secrets [ Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Question about Myth, storage and multiple BEs |
This is likely a newbie question, but I’m going to be adding to my combo BE/FE and trying to wrap my mind around the architecture of it all. I’ve been reading the wiki and here and I think I end up with more questions then I had before… But let me start here. First. How does Myth handle multiple BEs with multiple PVR cards and storage. Quote: Example: MBE has a Air2PC card and 250GB hdd. SBE has 500 PVR card with 2x 400GB hdds and room to add hdds. MBE fills it’s storage first while SBE has plenty of space and recordings ready to expire. All boxes are networked together.
Does the recording from the MBE Air2PC ‘float’ over to the SBE? Will it force the storage on the local hdd (MBE) even if this means deleting newer ‘expiring’ recordings? On the above example can all hdds be used to their maximum limit or only what might ‘fit’ completely on the drive. ie do all the drive space combine to make 1 big drive or partition? On the above example, lets add a HDHomerun to the network. Where will it’s recordings be held? TIA |
|
| Author: | cecil [ Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
As far as I'm aware, the storage will remain with the box the tuner is defined on. So, autoexpire will kick in on MBE.... You have to define the HDHR on a BE, it doesn't matter that it is on your network. |
|
| Author: | Too Many Secrets [ Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
So the tuner is 'married' to the storage in it's box by default? So then with the above example it would be best to add the HDHR to the BE with larger drives and hdd expandability. Correct? It would be cool though to be able to 'pool' all BE drives into one big drive, writable by any tuner in any BE. But I guess the network would really take a beating, and other downsides too. Just trying to figure out where and how to expand. |
|
| Author: | khrusher [ Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
this google search has lots of good comments: http://www.google.com/search?q=mythtv+slave+backend here is an intresting dialog... http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/90564 |
|
| Author: | Too Many Secrets [ Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks for the links. I have been reading more on this and the Storage Groups. It's sounding interesting. Notice Quote: MythTV will balance concurrent recordings across the available directories in a Storage Group in order to spread out the file I/O load. MythTV will prefer filesystems that are local to the backend over filesystems that are remote until the local filesystem has 2 concurrent recordings active or other equivalent I/O, then the next recording will go to the remote filesystem. The balancing method is based purely on I/O, Myth does not try to balance out disk space unless a filesystem is too low on free disk space in which case it will not be used except as a last resort.
This is implemented in 0.21 |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|