[mythtv-users] Storage Groups question
james.orr7 at gmail.com
Mon Jun 22 14:22:34 UTC 2009
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Michael T. Dean <mtdean at thirdcontact.com>wrote:
> On 06/19/2009 08:31 PM, James Orr wrote:
>> From the wiki ...
>> MythTV will balance concurrent recordings across the available directories
>>> MythTV will balance concurrent recordings across the available
>>> 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
>>> 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
>>> to balance out disk space unless a filesystem is too low on free disk
>>> in which case it will not be used except as a last resort.
>> I'm a little unclear about the local versus remote part there.
>> I have a master backend and a slave backend. The drive on each backend is
>> shared via nfs and mounted on the other. When I started watching some
>> livetv to test things out, using a tuner on the slave backend it started
>> recording to the nfs drive. Based on what it says above, shouldn't it
>> gone to the local drive first? Or am I not supposed to mount with nfs and
>> myth can directly access remote filesystems itself?
> Since you said that you were just testing things out, I'm guessing both of
> the drives (the local and remote) were empty drives and were identical (i.e.
> same size). If so, then Myth was likely unable to determine that the
> filesystems were different, so when it chose a directory, it happened to
> just get one that was on a remote filesystem.
> Once you've got some recordings on one or the other filesystem--enough to
> change their available capacity by a number of megabytes--Myth will know
> they're different filesystems. Therefore, it shouldn't keep happening.
No, the drives are different sizes and one of them had content. I've run
mythtv for a long time now (5 years!!), but I just added in a slave backend
for the first time so that drive was empty but the other was not.
However, I've decided to remove the nfs mounts from the storage groups so
that all recording will be local, and if one of the drives starts to get too
low in space I can always manually move a few files around.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the mythtv-users