Comskip build 91: Major speed increase

[erik]

Finally I found some time to speed up Comskip
Here are the results

Changes in 0.79.91
- MAJOR SPEED INCREASE! 20% to 45% faster (depending on your CPU) then the previous builds

[HtV]

Changes in 0.79.91
- MAJOR SPEED INCREASE! 20% to 45% faster (depending on your CPU) then the previous builds

Wow . Thanks alot.

[-Oz-]

awesome, cuz i'll have to upgrade.

[zehd]

Finally I found some time to speed up Comskip
Here are the results

Changes in 0.79.91
- MAJOR SPEED INCREASE! 20% to 45% faster (depending on your CPU) then the previous builds

Erik, would that speed increase also mean a bit less on the CPU?

My PVR is marginal trying to record two shows AND run two comskips during the recording. I'm not complaining, I know a faster computer does this quite well..

Just wondering whether I should try enabling comskipping during recording now...

I know that setting Live_tv=1 will increase the CPU requirements...

[pastro]

Erik, would that speed increase also mean a bit less on the CPU?

My PVR is marginal trying to record two shows AND run two comskips during the recording. I'm not complaining, I know a faster computer does this quite well..

Just wondering whether I should try enabling comskipping during recording now...

I know that setting Live_tv=1 will increase the CPU requirements...

I doubt that it will use less of the CPU, just less time on the CPU total.
You might want to set the play nice settings.
This is what I have in my config.
play_nice_start=700
play_nice_end=2300

[zehd]

I doubt that it will use less of the CPU, just less time on the CPU total.
You might want to set the play nice settings.
This is what I have in my config.
play_nice_start=700
play_nice_end=2300

I haven't quite been keeping up with the latest. What does play nice mean? (in this context)

[User]

Thank you! I'll give it a whirl. Our household appreciates what you do.

[erik]

Erik, would that speed increase also mean a bit less on the CPU?

My PVR is marginal trying to record two shows AND run two comskips during the recording. I'm not complaining, I know a faster computer does this quite well..

Just wondering whether I should try enabling comskipping during recording now...

I know that setting Live_tv=1 will increase the CPU requirements...

As long as comskip can run faster then realtime running in parallel mode will lower the CPU load.

I am running comskip myself on an AMD Geode 1400MHz CPU (Yes I upgraded from a VIA Samual 2)
I use two tuners so two recordings in paralell and running two SD comskips generate a CPU load of less then 50% (about 30% actually).
The system doubles as server and because Comskip run's at idle priority (that is very low priority) you don't actually notice its running.

Setting live_tv=1 creates a higher disk traffic. When your disks are fast that should not be a problem.

[zehd]

As long as comskip can run faster then realtime running in parallel mode will lower the CPU load.

I am running comskip myself on an AMD Geode 1400MHz CPU (Yes I upgraded from a VIA Samual 2)
I use two tuners so two recordings in paralell and running two SD comskips generate a CPU load of less then 50% (about 30% actually).
The system doubles as server and because Comskip run's at idle priority (that is very low priority) you don't actually notice its running.

Setting live_tv=1 creates a higher disk traffic. When your disks are fast that should not be a problem.

Thanks for your work erik

[pastro]

The play nice settings go in the comskip.ini file. As you probably could see it's in military time and it lowers the process priority. I don't think they are there by default, so if you want them, add them.
My Celeron isn't very fast so it never keeps up with live tv and always uses a big hunk of the CPU. Erik made a good point in that if your system can keep up with livetv then the new release will lower the CPU. If you run in post processing mode it will still use whatever it can, just for less time.