[mythtv-users] More scheduling scheduler

Max Barry mythtv at maxbarry.com
Wed Sep 13 02:57:39 UTC 2006

David Engel wrote:
> I've been busy with various other things to the point I've had little
> time to be much more than a Myth user.  With the days growing shorter,
> that will hopefully change but how much is TBD.

Welcome back! :)

> I have two main issues with the current softpad approach.
> First, I changed the priority sorting to prefer padded programs in a
> way that isn't acceptable for inclusion in trunk.  That could possibly
> be remedied by adding explicit priorities for start and end softpads.
> I'd hoped to avoid needing priorities for that, but I currently don't
> see any other way with the current, multi-candidate approach.

By "explicit priorities," do you mean something the user would specify
via an option, or a hidden hard-coded value to be used internally?

I don't think a user option is appropriate, since by using this feature,
they're already saying, "I want something that doesn't cause conflicts
like the current hard padding options, but will modify the schedule,
unlike the current pre-roll." That is, the priority's implied.

> Second, in order to add partial padding when full padding can't be
> done, another scheduling step is need do it.  If another step is
> added, it's not clear to me that the rest of the current,
> multi-candidate approach is worth it.  Why not go back to something
> along the lines of what Max Barry originally proposed (though, without
> the mixing of soft padding with pre/post-roll).

Isn't partial padding already working? But I vote for whatever's
simplest to implement. As with Paul, I'm yet to encounter programs that
can only be partially softpadded. It doesn't seem worth worrying about.

Ready to test the next softpad update!


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list