[mythtv-users] scheduler confusion

[blind Pete]

On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 08:20:58 +0930
Mark Perkins <perkins1724 at hotmail.com> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mythtv-users-bounces at mythtv.org [mailto:mythtv-users-
> > bounces at mythtv.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Worthington
> > Sent: Saturday, 6 September 2014 3:20 AM
> > To: Discussion about MythTV
> > Subject: Re: [mythtv-users] scheduler confusion
> > 
> > On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 11:59:39 -0400, you wrote:
> > 
> > >On 09/05/2014 11:15 AM, Mark Perkins wrote:
> > >> From: Michael T. Dean
> > >>> On 09/05/2014 08:25 AM, Michael T. Dean wrote:
> > >>>> On 09/05/2014 07:52 AM, Mark Perkins wrote:

Mark, 
Can you configure your email client to enter something more 
specific than "you"?  It gets confusing in multiperson threads.  

[snip]
> > >The only time this is "broken" is when you have a so many
> > >concurrent recordings on a given mux that at least one of them
> > >spills over to another physical device (say you now have devices 1
> > >and 3 recording from mux 1) and the recording on the "later" (=
> > >higher scheduling order, in this example device 3) device has a
> > >longer run time than all of the recordings on the earlier device
> > >(device 1).  At the point the final recording on device 1
> > >finishes, device 3 is being used for mux 1, but if a new recording
> > >from mux 1 starts when device 1 (and 2) is not being used for
> > >recording from other mux'es, it will start the new recording on
> > >device 1, so you'll still have devices 1 and 3 used for the same
> > >mux until the recording on device 3 finishes.  In other words,
> > >you'll need both a spill over (more concurrent recordings on a
> > >given mux than virtual tuners on the physical device) /and/ the
> > >latest-ending recording must be placed on the
> > >higher-schedule-order device /and/ a new recording from the same
> > >mux must start before that (latest-ending) recording on the
> > >higher-schedule-order device ends /and/ at least one
> > >lower-schedule-order devices must be
> > >unoccupied/not-in-use-for-a-recording-on-a-different-mux at the
> > >time.

No.  The trigger seems to be having time overlaps (we are never 
going to get all of the broadcasters in the world to start programs 
on the hour - so that is a given) AND 
(overflow number of virtual tuners (rare) OR allowing the scheduler
to have a favourite tuner (that is a given)).  

In the example below Mark's tuner one grabbed a program from 
channel 9 and then a program from channel 23, leaving tuner
two to pick up a program from channel 22 - despite the duplication.  

[snip]
> I see the same behaviour as Stephen. At the time I expected it to
> work the way Mike described but that was not what I was seeing in
> practice (Dec 13 / Jan 14) hence the earlier threads. Nor what it
> seemed others were seeing in practice.
> 
> I still don't see the behaviour as described by Mike. It only takes
> three straightforward recordings to demonstrate. In the below example
> there are no other subsequent recordings until 8 o'clock so with just
> three recordings I can get the same multiplex (ABC2 and ABC3 are the
> same multiplex) to tie up two physical tuners where each physical
> tuner is setup for five multirec:
> 
> $ mythbackend --printsched
[big edit]
> Title - Subtitle            Ch Station Day Start   End  S C I T N Pri 
> Dora The Explorer            9 Nine Ad  06 06:30-07:00  1 1 1 A 1 0 
> Yo Gabba Gabba! - Pets      22 ABC2 /   06 06:30-07:30  1 6 6 A 6 0
> Kid Vs Kat - Down The Drain 23 ABC3     06 07:10-07:20  1 1 1 A 1 0

Will post idle thoughts in another email, feel free to tell me 
that I'm wrong.  It has happened before.  

-- 
testing
bP