On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 02:47:35PM +0200, Peter Corlett wrote:
> It's debatable whether a single ffmpeg instance could take advantage of that
> many cores since Amdahl's Law will kick in as it tries to co-ordinate
> everything. Split it into multiple four- or eight-thread encodes and run them
> in parallel on that monster server, or even better, run them in parallel on a
> fleet of much-cheaper desktop machines.
>From my understanding of how yer typical video codec works (which could
of course be wrong!) I would think it's one of the few common tasks that
can take advantage of that many CPUs, as the parallelisable proportion
is very large.
A video file consists of a list of chunks, each of which consists of one
complete frame followed by a bunch of diffs from one frame to the next.
If you're decoding, hand one chunk to each CPU and process them in
parallel, and hand each CPU a new task when it finishes. There's some
small overhead in figuring out where each chunk begins, and in wrangling
pointers so that you end up with the results in a sequence of decoded
frames. Encoding is of course similar.
--
David Cantrell | top google result for "internet beard fetish club"
I'm in retox
_______________________________________________
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer
