Matthias Schwarzott schrieb:
On Montag, 13. April 2009, Steffen Barszus wrote:
Hi all!
Hi!
is there any way to let vdr ignore any directories which do not belong to it ?
What i have seen is that vdr is recursive checking all directories even on second and third video directory.
If the logic is that all needs to be in video.0 directory and its subdirectories and symlinks will be required to let vdr find the recordings, it should not check the other video directories.
[deleted some text that did not made sense to me]
i did a mount --bind /proc proc/ in video.01 resulting in vdr searching the proc filesystem resulting in plenty of error messages to the log (no permission etc) which filled up the log, which in turn filled up my root filesystem with within 15 min or so.
I have a directory containing a chroot env. not readable by vdr - except i forgot to unmount the proc in time.
Think there might be others as well that are using the big disks for other space consuming things - nobody else run into this ?
I don't understand why people do put other stuff into vdr video directories? If I want to have video directory and a directory containing iso images why not do
mkdir video mkdir iso and put the stuff there?
That doesn't help. /dev/hda1 3,4G 1,4G 1,8G 44% / (microdrive which is containing video.00, with symlinks, index etc) /dev/sdb1 932G 929G 3,3G 100% /var/lib/video.01 /dev/sda1 932G 600G 333G 65% /var/lib/video.02
bindmount only works properly in newer kernels. Still on 2.6.24. If you have an idea of how to use the big harddisks for something else without preallocating space for other tasks (i.e. partitioning), i would be happy to hear. I'm pretty aware that this might not be good idea to do things like i did. On the other hand i think what vdr does is a bad idea and unnecessary. period.
Still I support the opinion that vdr should not silently delete files it does not know.
vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories.
Steffen
On 15.04.2009 08:24, Steffen Barszus wrote:
...On the other hand i think what vdr does is a bad idea and unnecessary. period.
Still I support the opinion that vdr should not silently delete files it does not know.
vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories.
From the VDR/INSTALL file:
Note that you should not copy any non-VDR files into the /videoX directories, since this might cause a lot of unnecessary disk access when VDR cleans up those directories and there is a large number of files and/or subdirectories in there.
The video directory is VDR's own space, there shall be nothing else in there. If the user puts anything non-VDR related into it (even by mistake), it's their fault.
Klaus
Klaus Schmidinger schrieb:
On 15.04.2009 08:24, Steffen Barszus wrote:
...On the other hand i think what vdr does is a bad idea and unnecessary. period.
Still I support the opinion that vdr should not silently delete files it does not know.
vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories.
From the VDR/INSTALL file:
Note that you should not copy any non-VDR files into the /videoX directories, since this might cause a lot of unnecessary disk access when VDR cleans up those directories and there is a large number of files and/or subdirectories in there.
The video directory is VDR's own space, there shall be nothing else in there. If the user puts anything non-VDR related into it (even by mistake), it's their fault.
Klaus
I know that and what i did - and this might not be suggested (i'm mostly happy user since 7 years now). My question was: Why ?
It should not be necessary for vdr to check at all second (or third) harddisk. Going into directory hierarchy at disk one should be good enough. I could understand if vdr would blend into one structure directories/files on all harddisk without the symlinking - but fixing things like that needs to be done manually. So why not drop this checking ? What you expect to gain from checking directories not reachable symlinked from video.00 ? Its not only my use case - but also why vdr should waste time/cpu cycles to do that without gaining something.
On 04/15/09 08:57, Steffen Barszus wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger schrieb:
On 15.04.2009 08:24, Steffen Barszus wrote:
...On the other hand i think what vdr does is a bad idea and unnecessary. period.
Still I support the opinion that vdr should not silently delete files it does not know.
vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories.
From the VDR/INSTALL file:
Note that you should not copy any non-VDR files into the /videoX directories, since this might cause a lot of unnecessary disk access when VDR cleans up those directories and there is a large number of files and/or subdirectories in there.
The video directory is VDR's own space, there shall be nothing else in there. If the user puts anything non-VDR related into it (even by mistake), it's their fault.
Klaus
I know that and what i did - and this might not be suggested (i'm mostly happy user since 7 years now). My question was: Why ?
It should not be necessary for vdr to check at all second (or third) harddisk. Going into directory hierarchy at disk one should be good enough. I could understand if vdr would blend into one structure directories/files on all harddisk without the symlinking - but fixing things like that needs to be done manually. So why not drop this checking ? What you expect to gain from checking directories not reachable symlinked from video.00 ? Its not only my use case - but also why vdr should waste time/cpu cycles to do that without gaining something.
I am not going to touch this multi-directory stuff - except for removing it from VDR altogether. I was never happy with this and deeply regret ever letting me talk into implementing this...
Klaus
vdr-bounces@linuxtv.org schrieb am 15.04.2009 08:41:02:
vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories.
From the VDR/INSTALL file:
Note that you should not copy any non-VDR files into the /videoX directories, since this might cause a lot of unnecessary disk access when VDR cleans up those directories and there is a large number of files and/or subdirectories
in
there.
The video directory is VDR's own space, there shall be nothing else in there. If the user puts anything non-VDR related into it (even by mistake), it's their fault.
Klaus
A pretty much simplified approach ;-)
A simple use case: * standalone settop box with VDR and DVD recording capability * OS gets a seperate small partition * /videoX get the big rest
Now install the usual suspects: vdr-burn or vdrconvert
They need a lot of temporary space. So there are two options: * blocking ++20GB just for temporary files for burning and greating a seperate partition * put the temp files for burning in /videoX ;-)
The second approach is the most usefull assuming a typical 100..200GB HD. Hence the INSTALL file is a lame excuse. We should find a good aproach to solve this even when a single disc space is used. Don't forget, the majority of users will never use RAID, LVM and similar advanced concepts. Better focus on KISS.
Peter
P.S. I put it in /videoX on a stand alone box for my brother and had to make a lot of modifications to script tools like burn and vdrconvert to insure their temporary directories are NOT killed by VDR. This caused initially a LOT OF TROUBLE ...
On 04/20/09 10:56, Peter Dittmann wrote:
vdr-bounces@linuxtv.org schrieb am 15.04.2009 08:41:02:
vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories.
From the VDR/INSTALL file:
Note that you should not copy any non-VDR files into the /videoX directories, since this might cause a lot of unnecessary disk access when VDR cleans up those directories and there is a large number of files and/or subdirectories
in
there.
The video directory is VDR's own space, there shall be nothing else in there. If the user puts anything non-VDR related into it (even by mistake), it's their fault.
Klaus
A pretty much simplified approach ;-)
A simple use case:
- standalone settop box with VDR and DVD recording capability
- OS gets a seperate small partition
- /videoX get the big rest
Now install the usual suspects: vdr-burn or vdrconvert
They need a lot of temporary space. So there are two options:
- blocking ++20GB just for temporary files for burning and greating a
seperate partition
- put the temp files for burning in /videoX ;-)
The second approach is the most usefull assuming a typical 100..200GB HD. Hence the INSTALL file is a lame excuse. We should find a good aproach to solve this even when a single disc space is used. Don't forget, the majority of users will never use RAID, LVM and similar advanced concepts. Better focus on KISS.
Believe me, dedicating the video directory to VDR and VDR alone *is* KISS ;-)
Why not put the video directory one level down? Like
/vdr/videoX
and put the other stuff into /vdr, or, even better, into /vdr/other-stuff?
Klaus
On Montag, 20. April 2009, Peter Dittmann wrote:
vdr-bounces@linuxtv.org schrieb am 15.04.2009 08:41:02:
vdr is not deleting files it does not know. Its only deleting empty directories in its video directories.
From the VDR/INSTALL file:
Note that you should not copy any non-VDR files into the /videoX directories, since this might cause a lot of unnecessary disk access when VDR cleans up those directories and there is a large number of files and/or subdirectories
in
there.
The video directory is VDR's own space, there shall be nothing else in there. If the user puts anything non-VDR related into it (even by mistake), it's their fault.
Klaus
A pretty much simplified approach ;-)
A simple use case:
- standalone settop box with VDR and DVD recording capability
- OS gets a seperate small partition
- /videoX get the big rest
Now install the usual suspects: vdr-burn or vdrconvert
They need a lot of temporary space. So there are two options:
- blocking ++20GB just for temporary files for burning and greating a
seperate partition
- put the temp files for burning in /videoX ;-)
Option 3: Mount your big partition onto /var/vdr (or any other point you choose) and put vdr's video directory into /var/vdr/video, and other vdr-burn temp stuff into /var/vdr/vdr-burn-temp or /var/vdr/temp/burn
As I understand it: It is a unix principle to form the directory tree based on logical structure and not on physical disk layout.
Regards Matthias
On 20.04.2009 10:56, Peter Dittmann wrote:
A simple use case:
- standalone settop box with VDR and DVD recording capability
- OS gets a seperate small partition
- /videoX get the big rest
To add some more variations to the same solution the others already mentioned:
- Mount your big disk to /mnt/data - Put video to /mnt/data/video - either: - pass /mnt/data/video directly to VDR - put a symlink from /video to /mnt/data/video - bind-mount /mnt/data/video to /video
All theee solutions work without any trouble, and there's plenty of other space on /mnt/data available.
@Klaus: Since many people seem to miss this obvious solution, maybe you should add this as example to the documentation?
Cheers,
Udo
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Udo Richter udo_richter@gmx.de wrote:
To add some more variations to the same solution the others already mentioned:
- Mount your big disk to /mnt/data
- Put video to /mnt/data/video
- either:
- pass /mnt/data/video directly to VDR - put a symlink from /video to /mnt/data/video
This is the method I use and I haven't had any problems at all. Originally I was mounting a dedicated harddrive to /storage/sata0/recordings for example and symlinking /video to it but I've recently been testing using my fileserver for recording so I can completely remove all harddrives from my vdr boxes. In that case on the fileserver I am mounting the harddrive to /mnt/lan/recordings and on the vdr box symlinking /video to it.
So far it has worked great. Although I'm finding that the dedicated 500GB harddrive isn't going to suit my hdtv recording needs for long.
On 20.04.2009 10:56, Peter Dittmann wrote:
A simple use case:
- standalone settop box with VDR and DVD recording capability
- OS gets a seperate small partition
- /videoX get the big rest
To add some more variations to the same solution the others already mentioned:
- Mount your big disk to /mnt/data
- Put video to /mnt/data/video
- either:
- pass /mnt/data/video directly to VDR
- put a symlink from /video to /mnt/data/video
- bind-mount /mnt/data/video to /video
All theee solutions work without any trouble, and there's plenty of other space on /mnt/data available.
@Klaus: Since many people seem to miss this obvious solution, maybe you should add this as example to the documentation?
Not only that. Most people start from some kind of distribution. However it seems to have developed into a kind of standard to mount the video partitions directly. E.g. ctvdr/debian uses (I think ...) /var/vdr/videoX directly to mount the partition. Strange as it finally uses symlinks to create the /videoX. So change would be very small indeed.
Althought the suggestions seems sensible and simple non of the distributions have currently been thinking about this issue ... Seems like this hasn't been that obvious, so thanks for suggesting it ;-)
Peter
Quoting Peter Dittmann Peter.Dittmann@pldsnet.com:
E.g. ctvdr/debian uses (I think ...) /var/vdr/videoX directly to mount the partition.
The directories are named /var/lib/video.XX and this are not necessary partitions, but could be of course.
Strange as it finally uses symlinks to create the /videoX. So change would be very small indeed.
I can't see any evidence for this symlinks, and I don't know a reason for this. The vdr gets told via the option '-v /var/lib/video.00' where the video dir is located.
Gerald
---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
On Mittwoch, 15. April 2009, Steffen Barszus wrote:
Matthias Schwarzott schrieb:
On Montag, 13. April 2009, Steffen Barszus wrote:
Hi all!
Hi!
is there any way to let vdr ignore any directories which do not belong to it ?
What i have seen is that vdr is recursive checking all directories even on second and third video directory.
If the logic is that all needs to be in video.0 directory and its subdirectories and symlinks will be required to let vdr find the recordings, it should not check the other video directories.
[deleted some text that did not made sense to me]
i did a mount --bind /proc proc/ in video.01 resulting in vdr searching the proc filesystem resulting in plenty of error messages to the log (no permission etc) which filled up the log, which in turn filled up my root filesystem with within 15 min or so.
I have a directory containing a chroot env. not readable by vdr - except i forgot to unmount the proc in time.
Think there might be others as well that are using the big disks for other space consuming things - nobody else run into this ?
I don't understand why people do put other stuff into vdr video directories? If I want to have video directory and a directory containing iso images why not do
mkdir video mkdir iso and put the stuff there?
That doesn't help. /dev/hda1 3,4G 1,4G 1,8G 44% / (microdrive which is containing video.00, with symlinks, index etc) /dev/sdb1 932G 929G 3,3G 100% /var/lib/video.01 /dev/sda1 932G 600G 333G 65% /var/lib/video.02
bindmount only works properly in newer kernels. Still on 2.6.24. If you have an idea of how to use the big harddisks for something else without preallocating space for other tasks (i.e. partitioning), i would be happy to hear. I'm pretty aware that this might not be good idea to do things like i did. On the other hand i think what vdr does is a bad idea and unnecessary. period.
I thought bind mount does work on even older kernels, still shouldn't a symlink work too?
So I did setup lvm on my harddisks and made my video partition a logical-volume that can span as many harddisk as I let join the volume group. Still some time ago I had a setup using vdr's own support for multiple disks as you use it.
So I suggest you mount your disks somewhere else (like /mnt/large1 /mnt/large2) and then do bind mounts or symlinks from /var/lib
# mount /dev/disk1 /mnt/large1 # mount /dev/disk2 /mnt/large2
# mkdir /mnt/large1/video # mkdir /mnt/large1/video
# mount --bind /mnt/large1/video /var/lib/video.01 # mount --bind /mnt/large2/video /var/lib/video.02
Regards Matthias
Matthias Schwarzott schrieb:
I thought bind mount does work on even older kernels, still shouldn't a symlink work too?
Need to re-check - guess i mix something here. Some bind mount features only start working properly at 2.6.26+ (bind mount ro, move etc). Bind mounting readonly some directory makes full disk read only, but thats not required anyway here.
So I did setup lvm on my harddisks and made my video partition a logical-volume that can span as many harddisk as I let join the volume group. Still some time ago I had a setup using vdr's own support for multiple disks as you use it.
On LVM how does one know which disk will be used ? thats the main advantage - that all "handling data" is on slow, low power, silent, cool harddisk, real data gets on the big ones.
So I suggest you mount your disks somewhere else (like /mnt/large1 /mnt/large2) and then do bind mounts or symlinks from /var/lib
# mount /dev/disk1 /mnt/large1 # mount /dev/disk2 /mnt/large2
# mkdir /mnt/large1/video # mkdir /mnt/large1/video
# mount --bind /mnt/large1/video /var/lib/video.01 # mount --bind /mnt/large2/video /var/lib/video.02
Will test that
-
Gerald Dachs -
Klaus Schmidinger -
Matthias Schwarzott -
Peter Dittmann -
Steffen Barszus -
Udo Richter -
VDR User