Re: [slim] Re: Slimserver 6.5 MySQL Requirement - Bad!
On 10/10/06, smc2911 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: neurophyre;145151 Wrote: Funny, I came here to make a post asking if there's any way to improve performance on low-end machines.Hitting play on a directory with a few hundred files in it (say I want to listen to a shuffle of all my alternative music, or whatever) is absolutely glacial on my even more lowly 600MHz VIA Eden CPU (vaguely comparable to a 350MHz original Celeron, or so I've heard).The Squeezebox freezes hard for like 15 seconds until SlimServer can get itself together to build the playlist and start servicing UI requests again.Building huge playlists like that can certainly be slow. If you want ashuffle on a big list of music, I'd suggest you look at erlands pluginshere http://erland.homeip.net/download (primarily DynamicPlaylist andSQLPlaylist), which dynamically generates playlists in blocks of 10tracks at a time. The performance is far better this way. Or use the built-in Random Play, which does the same thing.-- I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,So across the Western ocean I must wander -- traditional ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Re: Slimserver 6.5 MySQL Requirement - Bad!
What becomes increasingly evident is that running SlimServer on anything other than a dedicated server is becoming less and less feasible as the software evolves and customers' expectations for robustness and responsiveness increases. I don't know why I should need a dedicated machine, really. I've no problem running slimserver 6.5 with samba, apache, another MySQL instance, mail... on the same two year old Via C3/1GHz with 512MB ram. That machine does sometimes crash for unknown reasons. But it's been up for three months now, surviving quite a few slimserver installations. I'd bet most of the issues asking for a dedicated machine are due to some other influence. -- Michael - http://www.herger.net/SlimCD - your SlimServer on a CD http://www.herger.net/slim - AlbumReview, Biography, MusicInfoSCR ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Re: Slimserver 6.5 MySQL Requirement - Bad!
On 10/10/06, Michael Herger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What becomes increasingly evident is that running SlimServer on anything other than a dedicated server is becoming less and less feasible as the software evolves and customers' expectations for robustness and responsiveness increases. I don't know why I should need a dedicated machine, really. I've noproblem running slimserver 6.5 with samba, apache, another MySQL instance,mail... on the same two year old Via C3/1GHz with 512MB ram. That machine does sometimes crash for unknown reasons. But it's been up for threemonths now, surviving quite a few slimserver installations.I'd bet most of the issues asking for a dedicated machine are due to someother influence. I gotta agree with this. I look at the slimserver user on my server, and it's using 150 MB of RAM and 2 percent average of the CPU, for all of its services put together. During a scan, CPU use goes up to 20% or so for about fifteen minutes (almost 14,000 tracks). It's the most important service on the box, aside from low-impactors like routing, firewalling, squid, and openvpn. For comparison's sake, Firefox is using about the same amount of memory and CPU on my XP laptop with 7 open tabs. -- I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,So across the Western ocean I must wander -- traditional ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Re: Slimserver 6.5 MySQL Requirement - Bad!
On 10/10/06, neurophyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really hope future releases will address low-end performance, as Isuspect that a fair portion of users are running SlimServer on NAS type boxes that aren't exactly powerhouses.And those users tend to be thetype that submit bug reports and patches and get things improved, I'dwager.NAS boxes are only going to get more powerful. I think SlimServer 6.5 is far superior to 6.3 in all places except for memory-starved machines. With memory as cheap as it is, the next generation NAS devices will be able to handle SlimServer without any issue (assuming you can get it to run/deployed -- that's a different issue!). Ben ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Re: Slimserver 6.5 MySQL Requirement - Bad!
On 10/10/06, neurophyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jack Coates;145137 Wrote: Honestly, I doubt that a modern machine would have issues running it, even with WoW going too :) Now if you're using a four or five year old computer as your main desktop, that's another matter.Quite a few people don't WANT to have to dedicate a modern machine to SlimServer.They want it running on a NAS-type machine.I've got a600MHz VIA C3 with 120MB available physical RAM that I use for NAS.Since I'm using it to store all my music and other files, since it's on 24/7 and since it does nothing else, it's the only logical choice to runSlimServer.Great. Add 256mb of RAM to that and you're all set. Otherwise you're just asking too much of the box. I certainly do NOT want SlimDevices to spent their time catering to a minority of people who won't spent $20 to upgrade the RAM on their server. Ben ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Re: Slimserver 6.5 MySQL Requirement - Bad!
On 10/10/06, neurophyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jack Coates;145137 Wrote: Honestly, I doubt that a modern machine would have issues running it, even with WoW going too :) Now if you're using a four or five year old computer as your main desktop, that's another matter.Quite a few people don't WANT to have to dedicate a modern machine to SlimServer.They want it running on a NAS-type machine.I've got aI didn't say dedicated.-- I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,So across the Western ocean I must wander -- traditional ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Re: Slimserver 6.5 MySQL Requirement - Bad!
mwatkins wrote: Slimserver didn't get any slimmer by adding MySql, my man. The devices are slim. The server serves them. It is not a tiny server, it is a server for slim devices. You are looking at it from the wrong viewpoint. The devices are simple, slim and dumb. All the brains are in the server. The server is not slim, it is feature rich. There is lots of demand for it to get more rich and powerful, far more than folks wanting the server to be slimer. It is all open source, if you don't like it, change it and submit patches. Your subject line in inflamatory and unjustified. MySql is bundled, and installed invisibly for 99% of the users. For technical folks who want to use another Sql engine, you can do it. As a technical person, you have to admit that there is no such thing as a true sql standard implementation. Every implementation has tradeoffs. While you can write to a pure SQL spec, all of the vendors improve the language to make development easier. Once you start to use it, you become tied into that dialect. You can have preferences that differ from those chosen by the developers. You can become a developer. Patches always welcome. -- Pat http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html ___ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
