<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Michael T. Dean <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mtdean@thirdcontact.com" target="_blank">mtdean@thirdcontact.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On 03/20/2014 09:35 AM, Phil Bridges wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I a master backend and a slave backend, in addition to two HDHR Primes. Currently, I have one Prime's tuners on my Master frontend, and one on the slave backend. I have the tuner numbers staggered, such that the 1st recording tuner is on my slave, the 2nd is on my master, 3rd is on the slave, etc. The LiveTV tuners are in reverse order.<br>
<br>
What ends up happening now is the majority of shows record on my slave backend this isn't a problem, *except* it causes my slave's recording drives to fill much quicker than the master, which could end up inadvertently auto-expiring shows. I have three hard drives in each machine - the master's drives have ~300G free on each, while the slave's drives have ~100G free now, and shrinking.<br>
<br>
What is the preferred method to set this up such that my hard drives are used more equally across both machines? Would it help to NFS mount the master's drives on the slave machines and add those to the storage group?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div></div>
You could.<br>
<br>
Alternatively, just go into mythtv-setup every once in a while and switch the Live TV and Schedule Order of your capture devices. If you invert them occasionally, it will invert the recording load.<br>
<br>
Or, to try to balance it better in the first place, set the order such that the first is on the master, then the next 2 on the remote, then the final on the master. This is /much/ better than M/S/M/S for ordering because the probability that the first tuner will be used during recording is high, that the 2nd will be used is slightly lower, the 3rd even lower, and the 4th the least. So, given that N1 means the number of recordings from tuner 1, N1 + N4 is likely to be closer to N2 + N3 than would be N1 + N3 vs N2 + N4.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Thanks for the response. Yeah - I figured I'd have to to a manual switch-around. I'll try the MSSMMS order next, to see how well that works.</div></div></div></div>