[mythtv-users] 0.25-beta release

[Michael Watson]

On 6/03/2012 10:03 PM, Mark Small wrote:
> On Monday 05 March 2012 17:49:29 Gavin Hurlbut wrote:
>> The release of 0.25-beta occurred last night just after midnight Pacific
>> Time.
>>
>> The release notes can be found at:
>> http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/Release_Notes_-_0.25
>>
>> The actual commit that became the v0.25-beta tag is 20f2c45cbf.
>>
>> It would be a good idea to read through the release notes, as there
>> are many many changes, big and small, and some of them will affect
>> your setup in ways that you may not at first expect.  If you are using
>> mythbuntu, I believe that their debs have already taken care of much
>> of the startup differences, and logging differences.  If you have been
>> building 0.24.x by hand, you will certainly want to look out for the
>> changes in logging in particular.
> Thanks devs for all of the ongoing hard work. I've skimmed through the release
> notes, and that looks like a ton of changes and improvements.
>
> A quick question:  Will 0.25 work well on a low powered MBE?  My MBE is an ARM
> based NAS (think Sheevaplug with 4 SATA ports).  It was stated on this list
> some time in the past that 0.25 would require a lot more CPU for the backend
> than previous versions.  Is this still the case?
My MBE is a P4 3.2 Ghz, 2Mb RAM, 7x SATA HDD, it runs ok under 0.25.  
(MBE has 2 DVB-T Tuners) with a SBE with 2x DVB-T Tuners connected.  
With the increased demand on mysql connections, it is now consistently 
using 200Mb of swapfile (under 0.24.x it very rarely used any 
swapfile).  It did however crash tonight (requiring a restart of the 
backend process)  whilst recording 5 shows, and watching one on a 
separate frontend.  I have not looked into why as yet.

Like always, it more depends on how many tuners, how many channels you 
are trying to record / schedule and how many FE you are trying to feed.

>
> Other folks on the list, please don't turn this question in to a demand that
> myth should run well on low powered machines.  We've had threads like that
> before, and they just got ugly.  I'd just like to know if 0.25 is feasible
> with my current setup.
>
> Thanks again for all of the hard work,
>
> Mark
>