[mythtv-users] HDHomeRuns on Separate Subnet

[Scott and Nicole Harris]

----------------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 17:42:06 +1000
> From: philledwards at gmail.com
> To: mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> Subject: Re: [mythtv-users] HDHomeRuns on Separate Subnet
>
> > I just read in this list recently someone mentioning they put their HDHomeRuns on a separate, self contained network with their backend. I am going to do the same because my backend is also my "file
> > server" and I have had times where recordings are cranking, and it take minutes to open my Quicken file (for example), so I'm looking to alleviate some of this network congestion. I can't seem to find the post > where the person outlined what they do....I recall they set it up to simply use APIPA.
>
> I think it may have been part of another discussion - see
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/525743#525743
>
> The general jist seemed to be that it's not necessary. I haven't
> created a new subnet on my virtualised MythTV Backend (Citrix
> XenServer) and all seems OK.

As a general point of practice, I'd agree it's not needed.  However, as I indicated, my myth backend is also my file server; all "My Documents, MY Pictures, etc" for all PCs in the house are redirected to shares on it.  I have had several occasions where (for example), opening my Quicken data file on my laptop takes an extraordinarily long time and then trying to use it is painfully slow.  At those times, I suddenly realize that I am recording 4 HD programs, I'm watching an HD show on one frontend, my wife is watching an HD show on another frontend, and the kids are watching a movie on yet another frontend.  As soon as that activity slows down, Quick is fine again, it could be a bottleneck at the disk access level, but considering my setup (4 individual drives for recordings, 1 individual drive for file server mount), I'm inclined to think that it is a network bottleneck.  This is step one in seeing if I can alleviate it.