Any way to improve skipping performance with .ts files?
|
2012-03-02, 10:03 PM
The A-110 is a little slow to react when trying to skip ahead/back and sometimes only seems to skip a few seconds instead of the 28 seconds it is supposed to. This is with .ts (ATSC) files. Is there any way to improve this? Will the new skipping patch for NPVR have any affect on this? Thanks.
My Plugins: PhotoFilter, MusicMonkey, Windows Desktop Gadget
2012-03-02, 10:37 PM
My experience with ATSC is that it is as fast and accurate as the PC . Can you compress and send your logs?
Here is a snippet from mine on a 1080i QAM file I pressed the 5 then Next to skip 300 seconds and was playing in under .7 seconds Code: 2012-03-02 17:24:56.309 [DEBUG][3] User pressed: D5Martin
2012-03-02, 10:58 PM
cncb Wrote:The A-110 is a little slow to react when trying to skip ahead/back and sometimes only seems to skip a few seconds instead of the 28 seconds it is supposed to. This is with .ts (ATSC) files. Is there any way to improve this? Will the new skipping patch for NPVR have any affect on this? Thanks. Skipping and pausing with my A-110 were also sluggish. I put in the new skipping patches, and they do seem to have improved the situation significantly.
2012-03-02, 11:30 PM
Here is the log from just a few skips forward followed by a few backward. The first couple were pretty quick (although it took a while for the OSD to pop up). The second or third skip backwards was a little slow.
I will try the NPVR patch to see if it makes a difference.
My Plugins: PhotoFilter, MusicMonkey, Windows Desktop Gadget
2012-03-02, 11:37 PM
The skipping patches shouldn't make any difference on an NMT. They're only about the PC.
2012-03-02, 11:38 PM
I wanted the web.log too.
Martin
2012-03-03, 01:15 AM
I don't see any major problem with accuracy at all in those requests all within a second of where NextPVR requested. The second request took more than two seconds and it does look like like NextPVR took some extra time calculating the position.
In the summary below what you see is the the time between the keystroke being process, the streaming request from web.log, and then finally the response when the stream is playing in the correct locations. Code: 2012-03-02 18:16:25.004 [DEBUG][3] User pressed: RightMartin
2012-03-03, 01:11 PM
mvallevand Wrote:The second request took more than two seconds and it does look like like NextPVR took some extra time calculating the position. Does this mean that this is something that could possibly be fixed in the NPVR code? Also, what I like to do on the PC is pause before I skip back and forward keeping it paused until I find the desired position. But on the NMT it seems to start playback as soon as I skip while paused. Is this behavior something that could be changed?
My Plugins: PhotoFilter, MusicMonkey, Windows Desktop Gadget
2012-03-03, 03:05 PM
cncb Wrote:Does this mean that this is something that could possibly be fixed in the NPVR code? Possible I guess but with all the variables it is hard to say if there is enough information for sub to track down why it takes so much longer to process your requests than it does mine. It might even be the file itself, as pointed out in the Quote:Also, what I like to do on the PC is pause before I skip back and forward keeping it paused until I find the desired position. But on the NMT it seems to start playback as soon as I skip while paused. Is this behavior something that could be changed? I read about it and this was a fairly recent change and I never implemented it because it's not something I would use. I just tried on the PC though and it seems that when I go Ctrl-Q followed by Ctrl-Right or FF/RW it starts playing just like on the NMT, and it is only with the mouse movement that stays paused. It might be a TSReader2 thing on the PC. Still, I will have a look to see if it is something I can even do on the client. Martin |
|
|
