Has SageTV 9 Gone Linux Only

[emotionnotion]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I'm confused.. Windows vs. Linux should have absolutely no bearing on v7 vs. v9.

Well it has meaning to me right now.

V9 does not work for me with Gemstone on Windows Home Server. It fails with Phoenix dependencies every time.

V7 installs without issue. So something is different in the Windows Domain.

[emotionnotion]

Originally Posted by stuckless

There is also the Android MiniClient, which isn't perfect, but, runs pretty well for most cases. I've replaced 2 of HD300 extenders with NVidia Shield Android TV units.

This is interesting. My second HD unit gave up yesterday (thats 1 HD200 and 1 HD300 gone on the network port!).

How good is the Android Mini Client on Nvidia Shield with Gemstone Movie views for example? Is it slow?

Definitely need to think about a better extender experience going forward as my HD units have been 'hammered'

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by emotionnotion

This is interesting. My second HD unit gave up yesterday (thats 1 HD200 and 1 HD300 gone on the network port!).

How good is the Android Mini Client on Nvidia Shield with Gemstone Movie views for example? Is it slow?

Definitely need to think about a better extender experience going forward as my HD units have been 'hammered'

The Android MiniClient will perform as good as the HD300 for most things. I've actually retired 3 of my HD300 devices and I run 2 NVidia Shield devices and an Nexus Player. (I also have a FireTV for testing -- but not a fan of the FireTV)

You an also take it for a spin on your Android Phone/Tablet if you want.

There is a chart that I created to compare the MiniClient with HD300 and full client, etc.
https://github.com/OpenSageTV/sagetv-miniclient/wiki

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by emotionnotion

Well it has meaning to me right now.

V9 does not work for me with Gemstone on Windows Home Server. It fails with Phoenix dependencies every time.

V7 installs without issue. So something is different in the Windows Domain.

That must be a WHS issue, because v9 works fine with Gemstone and Phoenix on Win7.

[emotionnotion]

yes Fuzzy it is WHS. I have a windows 7 version running without issue.

The crazy thing is that V7 and V9 have this plug-in issue with the phoenix dependencies that Gemstone uses. But only on WHS.

This is my core platform (low energy PC) with integrated Blu-ray/DVD extraction mechanism for my Movies Wall so I really don't want to lose it!

[emotionnotion]

Originally Posted by stuckless

The Android MiniClient will perform as good as the HD300 for most things. I've actually retired 3 of my HD300 devices and I run 2 NVidia Shield devices and an Nexus Player. (I also have a FireTV for testing -- but not a fan of the FireTV)

You an also take it for a spin on your Android Phone/Tablet if you want.

There is a chart that I created to compare the MiniClient with HD300 and full client, etc.
https://github.com/OpenSageTV/sagetv-miniclient/wiki

Thats great Stuckless; I will try that on one of our Android tablets and see how it goes. If this works well, its a plan for new extenders.

[sdsean]

but there are some server related parts that are native - the Power Management interfacing, checking free disk space, reading and writing windows registry keys, the BDA and DirectShow capture system, channel changing (USB-UIRT, for instance) - these are things that most people would require their server to be able to do, and they are 32-bit native libraries (called via JNI). Some of this can be worked around architecturally by using only network encoders (honestly, this would be my preferred architecture for any sage work - but I like total modularity) - others might be able to be easily ported to 64-bit. Some might be able to use external utilities instead of linked libraries. The real problem is we don't really have anyone active in the community comfortable enough with windows development in general, and JNI specifically, to really even start to sort it out - I'm certainly not the guy to go to, I've just spent a lot of time reading through the code to try to get a deeper understanding of the challenges.

the only thing there that would be hard is the tuner/graph stuff. . . i'm no expert, but im somewhat familiar with the win32 libraries. looking at the source. . most everything in there looks easily portable in terms of if you were going to do a "server-only" build. . .except for the capture/graph stuff which might be easy. . I just don't know much about that either. . .

but on the other hand. . . I should do some reading b/c I would think there should be more simple way via the Java side (as in a 64Bit->32Bit translation for JNI). . . i would think that there's plenty of projects out there that have the same issue. . .

[sdsean]

well damn. . .

my server at home actually doesn't have virtualization in the bios. . . (it's older, circa 2008). that means, no linux vm. . . unless i upgrade the bios (assuming that's possible)

so that means at least for now using sagetv on windows 7 x64 via a linux vm out for me anyway (assuming I could get multiple hd-pvrs to work with serial tuning on linux which i'm not sure I could). . .

<cries> i really want 64bit. . . not being able to run more than 2 extenders is killing me. . .litterally

[sdsean]

i did do some further reading. . and pretty much the only way around the JNI / Win32 limitations (without rewriting the native code and rewriting some parts of the java code) is to create a out-of-proc 64bit COM server lib, that you'd then link into sage, and the given 64bit com server would then call the win32 apis. . . this would work. . but it's likely to be slow and sense the main part of the native code that would be sensitive to that would be the tuners. . . i'm not sure that it's a great way to go. . .

<cries more>

[KarylFStein]

Fuzzy mentioned earlier in this thread about the option to run SageTV on the Windows server as a network tuner and have the server clients connect to on a Linux VM or physical server. I haven't tried this yet, but that's next on my list when I have some time to tinker. I did manage to get a 64 bit version of SageTV on a Linux VM, (pretty easy thanks to the documentation others have done), and connect to it, but ran out of time to test network tuning. I'm also concerned about performance as I was getting dismal (in my view) write speeds to my storage, (on the host OS even) and am worried about further impacts if the input and playback streams are also going along that same network path. With just a write test I was getting around 31MB/s.

[sdsean]

Well I kinda figured the performance would stink although that also depends greatly on what your true hardware is. . .

But like I said, I'd either have to buy new hardware. . in which case may as well just build a linux server. . . or I'd have to upgrade my bios. . .which is risky and may not matter. . .

So. . .yeah I guess I'll wait to see what you might come up with using sage itself as a windows tuner and basically chaining the servers (which I do like as an option). . .

I'm still surprised though I can't run more than 2 extenders. . . . I suspect it's phoneix/fan art plugins using up the extra memory. . . and maybe if i dump those I could get 3 working. . .

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by KarylFStein

Fuzzy mentioned earlier in this thread about the option to run SageTV on the Windows server as a network tuner and have the server clients connect to on a Linux VM or physical server. I haven't tried this yet, but that's next on my list when I have some time to tinker. I did manage to get a 64 bit version of SageTV on a Linux VM, (pretty easy thanks to the documentation others have done), and connect to it, but ran out of time to test network tuning. I'm also concerned about performance as I was getting dismal (in my view) write speeds to my storage, (on the host OS even) and am worried about further impacts if the input and playback streams are also going along that same network path. With just a write test I was getting around 31MB/s.

There are a few different methods you could use for the Linux VM storing on the host drives - I found that direct mapping samba shares was quick enough though. There are plenty here who record to a NAS from their sage server, and this should be far quicker than that. Keep in mind, the highest stream rate would be around 15-18Mbps for an ATSC broadcast. My testing from linux VM to windows host averaged 20-30MB/sec write speed (that's over 10 times faster than a single stream). Other options might be directly connecting the drive to the VM, Mounting the drive via iSCSI, etc.