|
||||||||
Faster deletions |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cambs
Posts: 874
|
Faster deletions
Lately, I am seeing much faster deletions, in less than half the usual time.
Anyone else noticed this? I have a 2TB HDD if that matters. David |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Do you have the new update?
They seem to be going at the same rate for me. (No update.) |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: South Coast, UK
Posts: 4,952
|
Having just moved back to my Foxsat-HDR I now remember how slow the process is
![]() This is one area the Samsung Freesat+ box excelled in be the recordings SD or HD. Automan. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cambs
Posts: 874
|
Quote:
Do you have the new update?
They seem to be going at the same rate for me. (No update.) Is it supposed to be faster after the beta? David |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,289
|
Quote:
No update yet.
Is it supposed to be faster after the beta? David |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cambs
Posts: 874
|
Quote:
No noticeable difference on mine, it's not mentioned in the release details either.
David |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,289
|
Quote:
I'll time a 30 & a 60 min HD delete.
David |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
You need to tune to a specific channel and not be recording for a test that can be repeated on both firmware versions. Deletion is a low priority interrupt so the harder the cpu is working the longer it will take to service the interrupt.
), it's a low priority thread. Or, to put it another way, the interrupt service routine runs at a low priority. (Which is perfectly sensible, of course).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,289
|
Quote:
To be pedantic (I just can't help it
), it's a low priority thread. Or, to put it another way, the interrupt service routine runs at a low priority. (Which is perfectly sensible, of course).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cambs
Posts: 874
|
Quote:
You need to tune to a specific channel and not be recording for a test that can be repeated on both firmware versions. Deletion is a low priority interrupt so the harder the cpu is working the longer it will take to service the interrupt.
Didn't see above post ! Nothing recording. Lost Land of Jaguar 60min BBCHD delete in 22 sec Lion Country 62min ITVHD delete in 26 sec Monty Don--Italy 60min BBCHD delete in 45 sec ditto 60min BBCHD delete in 26 sec I feel that I had seen much quicker deletes yesterday & in 2010 I timed 60 mins of SD deleting in just over a minute. The 1st of 2 Monty Dons gone in 45 & 26 seconds!? Why ? David |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,289
|
Quote:
I went to watch a bit of TV & do deletes in between.
Didn't see above post ! Nothing recording. Lost Land of Jaguar 60min BBCHD delete in 22 sec Lion Country 62min ITVHD delete in 26 sec Monty Don--Italy 60min BBCHD delete in 45 sec ditto 60min BBCHD delete in 26 sec I feel that I had seen much quicker deletes yesterday & in 2010 I timed 60 mins of SD deleting in just over a minute. The 1st of 2 Monty Dons gone in 45 & 26 seconds!? Why ? David The average bitrate of the recordings were different producing different file sizes. Tuner 1 was using a higher rate bitrate channel at the time. The box was recording something or maybe in the pre 15 mins watch for AR start codes. ---- The only way to test is to set up the same conditions on two boxes using different firmware. The same recording from the same channel and region is to be deleted. The box is tuned to the same channel No recording is ongoing or due in the next 20 mins or so. Even the length of the media list and the size of the HDD may have an effect. Not sure it's worth the effort
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cambs
Posts: 874
|
Quote:
Some reasons there could be differences
The average bitrate of the recordings were different producing different file sizes. The 2 MontyDons were quickly sequential D Tuner 1 was using a higher rate bitrate channel at the time. The box was recording something or maybe in the pre 15 mins watch for AR start codes. No Recording D ---- The only way to test is to set up the same conditions on two boxes using different firmware. Only have one box. DThe same recording from the same channel and region is to be deleted. True of the 2 MontyDons D The box is tuned to the same channel All 4 deletes were quickly sequential D No recording is ongoing or due in the next 20 mins or so Even the length of the media list and the size of the HDD may have an effect. Unchanged D Not sure it's worth the effort ![]() David |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
I grew up with Z80's no threads just different interrupt priorities
![]() Interrupt handling is split into two parts. The part that actually receives the interrupt and the service routine. The interrupts themselves have priority because it's obviously more important to deal with a disk interrupt (particularly if there is no DMA) than a keyboard one. This was more of a problem when computers were a lot slower. (thousands of time slower in some cases). But the initial part of interrupt handling does the absolute minimum required to note what has happened and make a note that it has to be dealt with before dismissing the interrupt. Then, at some later point, the system will run some code to deal with e.g. the character that has been captured. In the Z80 case it would typically be when the application programmer looked at a flag to see if, say, a character was available, and if it was, handle it - in modern operating systems a separate thread will run and put the character in a message queue. Obviously this is a massively complicated subject but that's a very brief precis. The delete thread can run at a very low priority because virtually everything else the box may be doing is more important. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Perchede, France
Posts: 1,936
|
1.00.15 While recording BBC ONE HD 1 - deleted 3 DS9 recodings (WD Green 1TB disk):
Recording 1 60 Mins SD - Delete:4 Secs Recording 2 60 Mins SD - Delete:4-5 Secs. Recording 3 60 Mins SD - Delete:4 Secs. So for me much faster than before. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:57.



), it's a low priority thread. Or, to put it another way, the interrupt service routine runs at a low priority. (Which is perfectly sensible, of course).