104 replies to this topic

[AriSuu]

mount -t cifs -o user=jack,pass=pw,rsize=8192,wsize=8192,nobrl,forcedirectio //192.168.1.6/hdd /hdd

These mount options seem to work well for me too (at least last three recordings were
very good).

[bib6666]

mount -t cifs -o user=jack,pass=pw,rsize=8192,wsize=8192,nobrl,forcedirectio //192.168.1.6/hdd /hdd

These mount options seem to work well for me too (at least last three recordings were
very good).

Very good info...
Some days ago i bought a lan disk on e-bay, recording to samba mount is very good (some errors but nearly not visible freezing or blocks). I tested with gemini 3.20 and also 4.00 (that is not good for me in cifs recording),same good results. Now i will try with Helenite, i like this image..
External lan disk is very nice, no need to have a pc always switched on...

[th_gates9345]

External lan disk is very nice, no need to have a pc always switched on...

I agree. also not excessive internal heat to the box. What brand and model is your landisk? Mine works fine with windows xp not the same with windows vista, how about yours?

[bib6666]

External lan disk is very nice, no need to have a pc always switched on...

I agree. also not excessive internal heat to the box. What brand and model is your landisk? Mine works fine with windows xp not the same with windows vista, how about yours?

Bought on ebay (about 26 euro + 15.90 shipment), no brand ,only labeled "USB2 landisk box", is a white one, mac style...
I have not Vista so i cannot say if it works fine.(on the box it says "compatible with Vista".
Did you try to record to your lan disk with some different DM500 Images?
Thanks

[th_gates9345]

Did you try to record to your lan disk with some different DM500 Images?
Thanks

Yes, I've recorded with Gemini 4.00 besides Pli Helenite. Pixelation appears with both images. About two years ago I'd installed Pi2 image, used to record to pc without errors. Now I'm looking for DM7020 (in USA), people says no video recording problems with this box.

[Roodkapke]

Most likely due to better networkperformance in the 7020.
The 500 simply lacks the power to do all these things.
Maybe the new 500+ is going to be a little better.

[bib6666]

Most likely due to better networkperformance in the 7020.
The 500 simply lacks the power to do all these things.
Maybe the new 500+ is going to be a little better.

Yes, DM500 has poor lan performance, but it seems there are different "series" , some have decent performance,other very poor.
However with my DM500, CIFS recording with old image were good, while recording to lan disk is good also with latest image
I am now testing with PLi Helenite

[bib6666]

There is a simple way to test lan speed of DM500.
With an ftp, tranfer a recorded file from movie directory of dreambox (on the mount point) to the pc hard disk.
I obtain a speed of about 1 mB/sec.
It would be interesting to post some test results.

[Roodkapke]

1 Mb/sec is never enough to get a proper recording.
It should be at least 5 Mb/sec.
Some channels produce a bitrate over 8 Mb/sec, so it will never fit.
That's why recordings show glitches.
But testing your lanspeed is one thing, the network it's connected to is as critical.
Using cheap switches and routers is a frequent source of speedproblems.

If you want proper recordings, a 600 or a 7020 is the better choice.

[dweeb4]

Hi Guys,
Have been away in Almerimar, south of Spain, for a week, lovely area. Anyway interesting discussion - some points

- direct recording seems to only be problematic in the DM500, as somebody said, the demux function is not powerful enough, so turning off TV replay is one of the ways to achieving better direct recording. This is not to say that there are not also weaknesses in how the Enigma coding handles recording - some study of the Neutrino code is probably necessary, as it seems to be more robust in this regard.

- network server based recording for the DM500 should be just as good as any other DM model as there is no strain on demux

- I've never identified where the demux function physically resides within the DM500 i.e. what chip and how is this function handled within the other DM boxes?

[dweeb4]

Interested in the lan speed test - How do I run it & test the max lan speed for a 500?

What is the LAN speed results for a 500 compared to other models? I would also love to see some test results.

[pieterg]

the problem is not the demux. The demux only gives you a hard limit on the number of filters that can be started.
Having not enough filters for your recording might cause the audio for instance not to be recorded at all, while the video is there.
It will never cause glitches and errors inside the recording itself.

The real bottleneck of the 500 is the very weak network performance.
And that performance will depend on CPU usage, so yes, neutrino might give a slightly better result than the much heavier enigma. And probably things can be tweaked by matching the requested network load to the nonstandard characteristics of the 500's ethernet performance (e.g. small buffersize, to get a smaller and more constant network demand)
But that would almost certainly sacrifyce performance and CPU usage on other boxes, which do not have such a weak network, and can handle huge buffers and burst transmissions without a problem.

[dweeb4]

Thanks Pieterg for your informative post - so if I understand correctly at the physical level, the chip(s) controlling the network function in the 500 are different to other boxes?

I know that, on the net, there is a mod to the 500 which recommends adding extra capacitors to the Power supply bypassing to the Asix AX88796L chip controlling ethernet networking - the PS bypassing on this chip is less than recommended in the chip's datasheet. I tried this mod with before & after recordings but it made no difference.

Is there any info on what chip(s) are used in the other models to control ethernet networking? Just out of interest, I don't have a box to open up.

[bib6666]

Thanks Pieterg for your informative post - so if I understand correctly at the physical level, the chip(s) controlling the network function in the 500 are different to other boxes?

I know that, on the net, there is a mod to the 500 which recommends adding extra capacitors to the Power supply bypassing to the Asix AX88796L chip controlling ethernet networking - the PS bypassing on this chip is less than recommended in the chip's datasheet. I tried this mod with before & after recordings but it made no difference.

Is there any info on what chip(s) are used in the other models to control ethernet networking? Just out of interest, I don't have a box to open up.

I read about hardware modification of DM500. It seems that sometimes the mod works fine, sometimes there is no difference.
Is your DM500 the one with Alps tuner or the one with old Philips tuner?
It would be interesting to test the lan speed (ftp a recorded file from dreambox to pc hdd, you can use any freeware fpt software)

[dweeb4]

My tuner is the Philips one. I just did a speed test - If I transfer a file from 500 to PC I get just over 3MB/sec (I transferred the 3.2MB Enigma file from /bin). If I transfer a movie file from the mount point of the 500 to the PC I get about 1.5MB/sec upload & 1.5MB/sec download - remember the mount point files is being transferred round trip from PC to 500 to PC. So is your >1MB/sec for a mount file?

[dweeb4]

Above speeds were with a router but using a direct ethernet crossover cable I get the same speeds so it's not the network that's the limiting factor

[dweeb4]

So, the problem I have now is that I thought server based recording would be error free but if these network speeds are correct than they fall far below the 5 to 8 MB/sec recommended by the PLi team members

[pieterg]

well, actually the stream datarate is 5 to 8 Mb/s (bits), so as long as your network can cope with a constant 1MB/s (bytes) you should be fine (though on the edge)

[dweeb4]

Sorry, I forgot my IT basics re bits & bytes - so my speed of >2MB/sec upload from 500 translates to >16mb/sec which should be more than ample for the TV channels datastream (in actual fact I think this is >3MB/sec but Enigma file is only 3.2MB so speed test is not v accurate).

So where does the bottleneck lie? Other dreamboxes use the STB0x25 CPU chip, I think so It can't be the CPU load? What are the other chip differences between 500 & other models? Sorry, but I keep coming back to this question don't I!

[pieterg]

The stb25xx has very limited ethernet performance. But I've heard some rumours that you could improve the network performance of the 500 by replacing come components. So no, it's not all the stb's fault. (as a matter of fact, the 600 performs significantly better with the same chipset).