[mythtv-users] scheduler confusion

[blind Pete]

On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 00:21:49 +0930
Mark Perkins <perkins1724 at hotmail.com> wrote:

> > On 1 Sep 2014, at 7:07 pm, "blind Pete" <0123peter at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:07:25 -0500
> > Bill Meek <keemllib at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>> On 08/31/2014 07:39 PM, blind Pete wrote:
> >>> ...
> >>> Could "something" be selecting virtual tuners in the same order
> >>> as mysql, rather than by cardinputid
> > 
> > Just a stab in the dark, but could the logic that avoids head to
> > tail recordings be selecting different tuners rather than different
> > virtual tuners?  Today I have seen consecutive programs on the same
> > sub-channel recorded on virtual tuners one and six while nothing
> > else was in use.  
> 
> Unlikely. Do you recall if the earlier of the two program's was on
> tuner 6? Was there an earlier recording that had just finished on a
> different multiplex?

No, I don't recall, but I have certainly seen things that I surprised
me.  

> I will try and post later how this can happen but don't have a lot of
> time right now and want to mention a few other things.
> 
> > Oddly, mysql lists six as coming after one.  
> 
> I don't think the MySQL order is of great concern. Of greater
> interest to me is that firstly your discrete (physical) tuners have
> different scheduling order values (which is the default setup but not
> the recommended setup). 

OooKaaayyyy...  

> The recommendation is to have them as the
> same value (all other things being equal). 

Will changing that require poking about in the database directly?  
And if I do do that will people shout at me?  (My guess is yes.)  

> And secondly your LiveTV
> order is the same as your recording scheduling order which can result
> in LiveTV viewing throwing curve balls at the scheduler (as Mike
> said). The recommendation is generally to have the LiveTV order as
> the opposite to the recorder scheduling order.

I don't remember messing with that, not that that is proof that 
I did not.  If and when I change the recording order I will look 
at the live TV order.  

Now, if the recommended priority order for tuning is fifteen "1"s, 
what should the liveTV priority order be?  

> However the bad news is that I don't think either of these
> observations are the cause of your current problems (given you
> mentioned that LiveTV is rarely used).

[big edit]
> Title - Subtitle Ch Station Day Start End   S C I T N Pri
> Muscle Car       73 7mate   04  16:11-16:39 1 2 2 A 2 -11
> Horsepower TV    73 7mate   04  16:39-17:00 1 1 1 A 1  -8
> Mythbusters      73 7mate   04  17:31-18:31 1 6 6 A 6 -10 
>                                      First problem, ^ 
>                                      should be 2,3,4 or 5
> 
> 
> I disagree. Mythbusters on SBS TWO had the higher priority so given
> they overlapped (just) this one got bumped to a subsequent tuner.

I was mis-interpreting priority as "get a tuner", rather 
than "get the most desirable tuner".   Can I make bumping 
one 7mate program to a second tuner bump all of them to 
that tuner?  These programs are not head to tail, but 
when they are that would allow "soft" pre and post recording 
to be made.  

> QI               21 ABC1    04  18:29-19:00 1 0 0 A P  -6 
> Mythbusters      32 SBS TWO 04  18:30-19:29 1 1 1 A 1  -9 
> ABC News         21 ABC1    04  19:00-19:30 1 0 0 D L -10 
>                                                     ^ 
>                                                 Don't like this, 
>                                                 6-15 free.
>                                                 Watched it "live". 
> 
> 
> I think I see the ABC News recording rule is a 'find one daily' rule.
> IIUC these types of rules can be sensitive to the timing of the
> episode that was used to create the rule (the 'day' starts at the
> starttime of the original recording). 

Very plausible.  There was an incident coming for tonight.  Without 
thinking to look at the scheduled start time I assumed that it must 
be a minute early, deleted the rule, created a new rule with a daily 
filter, and then noticed that it is scheduled to start on time.  
But it is scheduled to record.  

> Have you tried editing the rule
> to adjust the 'day' timing (IIRC functionality along these lines was
> added in 0.27 at some point.... I think). 

If I find out how to do that, I will.  


-- 
testing
bP