Evaluating: A few questions

General discussion of the software on topics that may not necessarily fit within any of the other forum topics available
Mike.Bwca
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2018 10:15 am

Re: Evaluating: A few questions

Post by Mike.Bwca » Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:18 am

Linwood wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:21 pm
I realize that "continuous" on all products (at least that I have seen) means it is still broken into segments...
In Blue Iris, the 'continuous' recording is exactly that. It is not broken into segments of continuous recordings & motion recordings.
If the recording video type is 'Continuous', any motion is merely a pointer into the Continuous recording. No duplication of video.
If the recording video type is 'When triggered', then each motion is a separate recording - IF the 'Combine' option is unchecked. Otherwise all motion recordings get appended according to the Combined time/size.

Linwood
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:02 pm

Re: Evaluating: A few questions

Post by Linwood » Sun Apr 07, 2019 5:22 pm

Mike.Bwca wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:18 am
Linwood wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:21 pm
I realize that "continuous" on all products (at least that I have seen) means it is still broken into segments...
In Blue Iris, the 'continuous' recording is exactly that. It is not broken into segments of continuous recordings & motion recordings.
If the recording video type is 'Continuous', any motion is merely a pointer into the Continuous recording. No duplication of video.
That's good to know, that motion clips are pointers.

But my comment on continuous being broken up was speaking about physical on-disk structure. Certainly continuous recording is not one huge file never broken into physical pieces. Sorry for muddying the water.

Linwood
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:02 pm

Re: Evaluating: A few questions

Post by Linwood » Sun Apr 07, 2019 5:26 pm

HeneryH wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:45 pm
It seems like BI is not a good fit for your needs. I hope you find an alternative that scratches all of your requirements.
Perhaps. Perhaps not. If that has a bit of "why talk about if you do not like it" my apologies, but in the FWIW department I am back trying it again. I had convinced myself that Luxriot was a better solution -- it was SUPER fast at review. Pretty much instant on the old laptop I am using for testing. Just amazingly fast.

Then it just stopped working. Nothing I could do could resurrect it. And (the free version) lacks any meaningful support, especially notable to me no active community.

I also tried Xeoma again; I try it every few years hoping it will work as I like their flow diagram configuration style. But it remains flakey; runs OK for a while, then something weird happens.

So am back trying Blue Iris again, because I'm willing to give up some functionality to get stability. And I do like that there is an active group here. Am going to give it another go, see how well the motion marking works as a substitute for a search ability.

Mike.Bwca
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2018 10:15 am

Re: Evaluating: A few questions

Post by Mike.Bwca » Sun Apr 07, 2019 8:08 pm

Linwood wrote:
Sun Apr 07, 2019 5:26 pm
...if that has a bit of "why talk about if you do not like it" my apologies...
No problem. Always good to get another opinion, and, maybe a solution or at least a work around to an issue.

I tried the evaluation version of Luxriot and many of the others, but, Luxriot was soooo expensive.
I'm still amazed at BI. IMO it has to be the best for the average to mid range user.

Linwood
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:02 pm

Re: Evaluating: A few questions - crashes / performance?

Post by Linwood » Mon Apr 08, 2019 1:23 pm

I set this all up clean yesterday on a fresh windows install on an old laptop (parts for the real server are on order, this is just to test).

I have five cameras, three set to 4mpx, two at 8mpx, all at one frame per second to limit performance issues.

The good news is the server ran flawlessly, I tested periodic snapshots and got exactly what I expected (I push those off site). Well, after finding I needed to manually install the c libraries (really? the install doesn't check?).

The bad news is that the performance was awful, bad enough that the desktop client kept crashing -- it would come to the splash screen and disappear entirely (process was gone), no errors, nothing. At least I suspect performance issues, the server was running 50-60% but hit 100% as I tried to start the desktop, but lack of error indication means I really do not know. The one thread I found in the forums related to similar startup was unresolved.

The cameras are set as direct to disk. And I confirmed they are at 1 fps. I rebooted several times, checked and rechecked various settings.

By way of comparison running Luxriot the same exact camera feeds keep the cpu between 10-15% busy, that's with motion detection on (software, high accuracy giving up performance), recording BOTH primary and secondary (just because it defaulted that way). If I also display all cameras on an RDP session (mirroring what I would do in BI) it runs about 45-50%, but I cannot get BI to even reliably run in that configuration.

Xeoma was a bit higher but comparable as well (I had the cameras at 2fps with it without issues).

But I don't like either of them because they are flakey.

Am I missing something with BI and performance? I really thought I would avoid "flakey" given its reputation.

I plan to have much more substantial hardware -- though still I had planned to reuse an older server, so not THAT fast. I also planned to record at about 4 fps, so I am a long, long way from being able to sustain that.

With recording direct to disk, no transcoding, is performance that constraining? Or might I be missing something?

I have read though lots of discussions and almost all seem to conclude going direct to disk is most of the solution beyond the obvious of limiting resolution and frame rate.

The old laptop by the way has a new SSD, 8GB of memory (BI uses very little), I7 M620 @ 2.67ghz. Inbound camera feeds are about 8mbs total at the ethernet port (everything is wired, no wifi involved), disk activity shows only a few percent, so all the constraint appears on the CPU. Laptop was wiped first, so it has no competing processes other than vanilla windows 10 fully updated.

Post Reply