I've found the better solution is to distribute the encoding
per song instead of per frame. No changes are required to whatever
encoder you are using.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Nick Burch
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2000 4:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] LAME: does the encoding code support
distributed processing?
Hi
I'm not all that clued up on the algorithms, but I think there is a more
fundamental problem with your idea than
the encoder.
Distributed.net will dish out about 15k a day to a pII-300 running 24/7.
Seti@Home will dish out about 500k a
day to a 24/7 pII-300.
128kbps mp3 data is about 1mb a minute, and the uncompressed wave is about
10mb a minute. Most
people feel the seti@home data throughput is high. Unfortunatly, a pII-300
running lame for 24 hours (about
1x encoding) will need about 14 gigabytes sent to it, and will return about
1.5 gigabytes to the server. That
sort of data throughput is unacceptable on all but a decent corperate lan.
So, even if the enoder will do it (which I think it will, based on previous
postings), the data you'll need to shift
around will be a bigger problem. Maybe for your few workstations it'll be
OK, but I'm not sure it'll have all that
many other applications.
Nick Burch
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
