Send Motion-user mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Motion-user digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Motion 4.2.2 vs 4.1.1 CPU usage (MrDave)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 18:27:05 -0600
From: MrDave <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Motion 4.2.2 vs 4.1.1 CPU usage
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
I recommend taking special note of the last statement.
"I also match the framerates as well."
In 4.2 Motion will speed up to match the FPS that the camera is sending
images.? Prior versions had difficulty decoding images when there were
differences between the Motion FPS and the camera especially when the
I-Frame interval was set to a high value.
On 7/19/19 12:16 PM, Tom Kennelly wrote:
>
> BTW any mismatch between the camera configuration (i.e., width and
> height sizes) and motion can increase CPU requirements.?? I also match
> the framerates as well.
>
> On 7/19/2019 2:11 PM, rmbusy wrote:
>> Thanks for this info.? It sounds like 4.2.2 should be less CPU usage
>> than 4.1.1, so I'll have to do some experimenting here to see if I
>> can figure out why it's gone up (the profiling link should help with
>> that).? I have all the notes from when I built 4.1.1. initially, and
>> the source zip files, so I should be able to reproduce that if need be.
>>
>> I would not expect going from Ubuntu 16.04 to 18.04 to be the cause,
>> but I won't rule it out either.? I have a spare drive, so I could
>> install 16.04 on it, and in theory, completely recreate my original
>> setup.? If only I had the free time to do everything I want to do
>> right now.
>>
>> I'll keep you posted.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rob.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/19/19 10:35 AM, tosiara wrote:
>>> This is my ARM board CPU usage over the previous year:
>>>
>>> image.png
>>>
>>> It is using USB webcam. In 2018 I changed pixel format from MJPEG to
>>> RAW and it decreased the CPU usage from ~65% to ~35%. In the middle
>>> on 2018 I merged NEON optimizations which saved even more CPU - to
>>> ~23%. I constantly update my motion to master branch, but since 2018
>>> CPU usage on this ARM device has not changed
>>>
>>> So I doubt your issue is in motion's code. It could be compile
>>> flags. If want to be sure, try profiling motion and compare:
>>> http://www.lavrsen.dk/foswiki/bin/view/Motion/MotionProfiling
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 7:16 PM rmbusy <[email protected]
>>> <mailto:rmbusy%[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> One other thing, in an attempt to reduce CPU usage, I've disabled
>>> auto_tune, and added mask files to 5 of the cameras to mask out
>>> foliage
>>> and areas that could cause excess triggering, and bumped the
>>> threshold
>>> from 5,000 to 10,000 on all of the 2MP cameras.? These changes
>>> were not
>>> needed with 4.1.1.
>>>
>>> I've also noticed a lot more motion detection of changing shadows,
>>> compared to what I used to see.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rob.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/19/19 9:08 AM, rmbusy wrote:
>>> > OS is Linux (before, Ubuntu Xenial 16.04 LTS, now Ubuntu Bionic
>>> > 18.04.2 LTS).? In both cases, I built motion from source.? I
>>> started
>>> > by installing the package with apt-get install motion to get
>>> all the
>>> > dependencies, then built from source and switched to it.
>>> >
>>> > Since there are really only 3 types / configurations of
>>> cameras, I
>>> > only tested the 3 types.? I watched the output of 'top' for
>>> about a
>>> > minute for each test.? I also waited for the initial startup
>>> to settle
>>> > (time for camera to respond with images) before recording the
>>> > numbers.? I don't have 4.1.1 building yet, so these numbers
>>> are for
>>> > 4.2.2.
>>> >
>>> > For the 2MP snapshot camera, after startup, before connecting
>>> to the
>>> > web page, it hovered between 25% and 45% CPU usage.
>>> > After starting the web page, the numbers hovered between 78.5%
>>> and 81.5%.
>>> >
>>> > For the 1MP streaming camera (5 frames / sec), it hovered
>>> between 23%
>>> > and 33%.
>>> > After starting the web page, 33.7% to 45.9%.
>>> >
>>> > For the 2MP streaming camera (5 frames / sec), it hovered
>>> between 42%
>>> > and 53.6%.
>>> > After starting the web page, 63.6% and 70.3%.
>>> >
>>> > I'm a little surprised no one had usage numbers between the two
>>> > versions.? Considering I'm using the same configuration files
>>> (with
>>> > updates for the new parameter names in 4.2), I was expecting
>>> others
>>> > would see this problem.? It's an issue for me, because I have
>>> more
>>> > cameras I want to add, but at this point with 4.2.2, the CPU
>>> is maxed
>>> > out.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Rob.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 7/18/19 11:12 PM, tosiara wrote:
>>> >> Could you compare CPU numbers running only one camera? The
>>> best to
>>> >> make 8 separate tests with each camera. This could help to
>>> understand
>>> >> the issue better
>>> >> Also, which OS are were you using before and now, and which
>>> motion
>>> >> version - binary package or compiled yourself?
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 9:33 PM rmbusy
>>> <[email protected] <mailto:rmbusy%[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> >>> I upgraded my system to the latest version of Linux, and at
>>> the same
>>> >>> time, upgraded Motion from 4.1.1 to 4.2.2.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I have 8 RTSP cameras set up, 5 cameras configured for
>>> snapshot mode at
>>> >>> 1 frame per second (all 2MP), and 3 streaming at 5 frames
>>> per second (2
>>> >>> 2MP, 1 1MP).? All of this is running on a quad core Rock64
>>> w/ 4GB DRAM,
>>> >>> at the default CPU frequency (1.3GHz).
>>> >>>
>>> >>> With 4.1.1, I was seeing around 150% CPU utilization (via
>>> top), and
>>> >>> when
>>> >>> connecting to the web page, around 300% CPU utilization.
>>> Since the
>>> >>> Rock64 is a quad core ARM processor, max is 400%.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Now with 4.2.2 and the same camera configuration files
>>> (updated with
>>> >>> new
>>> >>> option names), I'm seeing CPU utilization of 250%, and when
>>> connecting
>>> >>> to the web page, the numbers are maxed out, and the web page is
>>> >>> basically non-responsive.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Since I upgraded the underlying OS, I can't rule out that it's
>>> >>> requiring
>>> >>> more CPU cycles for Motion to do the same thing, but that seems
>>> >>> unlikely.? Running top doesn't show anything else using CPU
>>> cycles
>>> >>> (other than top).
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Can anyone confirm if 4.2.2 is using significantly more CPU
>>> cycles than
>>> >>> 4.1.1?? If I can't find a way to reduce the usage, I may
>>> have to go
>>> >>> back
>>> >>> to 4.1.1.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Rob.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>> Motion-user mailing list
>>> >>> [email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>>> >>> https://motion-project.github.io/
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Motion-user mailing list
>>> >> [email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>>> >> https://motion-project.github.io/
>>> >>
>>> >> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Motion-user mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>>> https://motion-project.github.io/
>>>
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Motion-user mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>>> https://motion-project.github.io/
>>>
>>> Unsubscribe:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Motion-user mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>> https://motion-project.github.io/
>>
>> Unsubscribe:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Motion-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
> https://motion-project.github.io/
>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/motion-user
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 17360 bytes
Desc: not available
------------------------------
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Motion-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
------------------------------
End of Motion-user Digest, Vol 157, Issue 29
********************************************
