rpi2

[maverick0815]

So i got me a rpi2 now to play around with it a little. Actually I wanted just to build a internet radio with this. On the other hand, I saw that there is some development for making it an md. For the previous rpi the wiki said, that mythtv-frontend is not possible, which  makes me wonder, if this would still apply to to the rpi2 with his 1g2g ram and quad-core.  In case there is a way to test this out, I'm volunteering.

[RayBe]

Hi maverick,
Here is some useful info for the RaspberryPi 2:
http://wiki.linuxmce.org/index.php/RaspberryPi#Disked_Media_Director
Have fun and thanks for testing.
Br,
Raymond

[phenigma]

I have not tested mythtv-player, nor built it for armhf.  I'll see about adding it to the builds.

J.

[maverick0815]

That would be quite cool. One other question, if just rhetorical. Since its a disked me, I could use Wi-Fi?

[Marie.O]

The same reason why you wouldn't want Wifi with a disked x86 MD apply to the rpi.

[phenigma]

I agree with posde.  However it is technically possible, but not provided for.  You would be in new territory. 

J.

[maverick0815]

Okay..taking it step by step....right now it's running wit: squeezelite :-)

[phenigma]

I've got ubunty trusty packages for the rpi2 and I'm working on an sd card install method.  Stay tuned. 

J.

[totallymaxed]

The same reason why you wouldn't want Wifi with a disked x86 MD apply to the rpi.

Why's that? We used to build MD's in that config in the distant past...2007-8 or there about.

Andy

[Marie.O]

Because wifi is not meant to transfer large amounts of data. imho wifi is great for getting access, but not for using it with HD content transfers. For example, the current bandwidth used by a public HD broadcaster in Germany is 11MBit/s - now take two people trying to watch that broadcast. In everything but the most perfect situations, you will get a problem.

[totallymaxed]

Because wifi is not meant to transfer large amounts of data. imho wifi is great for getting access, but not for using it with HD content transfers. For example, the current bandwidth used by a public HD broadcaster in Germany is 11MBit/s - now take two people trying to watch that broadcast. In everything but the most perfect situations, you will get a problem.

Well in my experience with a properly setup 802.11n or 802.11ac Wifi network with repeaters to fill in any dead zones etc we have regularly seen 5-6 simultaneous 11Mbts (or thereabouts some HD streams would be slightly higher here in the UK) being accessed without a problem. Of course you will get congestion and buffering if you push the LAN to its limits but there is no need to do that with modern Wifi router/LAN's. Yes you need a well implemented Wifi installation - a single router stuffed in the back of a closet is not going to deliver that. And the installation will be largely driven by what construction is used in the building etc. But all of those can be worked around by using multiple AP's strategically located.

Of course the other factor is that for most of the time, in most situations, there are not 5-6 HD streams being moved across the LAN.

All the best

Andy

[Marie.O]

I doubt your statement. 5-6 streams at 10MBit/s are 50-60MBits/s  - 802.11n (which has only been around since 2009 officially), is supposedly good for a thoughput of net 40MBit/s under good circumstances. Repeaters do not enlarge the bandwidth, only the covered area.

Good that your clients did not see any problems.

I will not trust wifi for my media consumption need, except maybe audio.

[totallymaxed]

I doubt your statement. 5-6 streams at 10MBit/s are 50-60MBits/s  - 802.11n (which has only been around since 2009 officially), is supposedly good for a thoughput of net 40MBit/s under good circumstances. Repeaters do not enlarge the bandwidth, only the covered area.

Good that your clients did not see any problems.

I will not trust wifi for my media consumption need, except maybe audio.

Its has nothing to do with 'trust' - its simply a matter of engineering, physics and spending the time needed to set Wifi LAN's up properly.

Our clients don't see throughput problems because we spend time installing and optimising their wifi - the results are worth the extra effort/cost (in most cases). There are always situations where a 'thrown' together wifi LAN will do the job - and of course the industry likes to portray wifi LAN's as something anyone can setup in 2 minutes with no technical effort! That's simply marketing crap. But if you want to extract the maximum from wifi then you need to spend the time/effort to get it.

In real world use with a properly configured Wifi LAN (using good quality hardware), and good coverage throughout the property (that's where the wifi repeaters are important and better signal quality translates into better throughput locally from that repeater - not for enlarging bandwidth) 802.11n can deliver 70Mbts+ and with 802.11ac we have networks delivering 90Mbts+. You need to use good quality Wifi AP's (a $45 USD unit will not have the throughput because its SOC and other components simply will never deliver it - a function of cost) and they need to be configured properly - and importantly the resultant LAN needs to be tested, and adjusted, if you want the maximum throughput.

See here; http://www.speedguide.net/faq/what-is-the-actual-real-life-speed-of-wireless-374

We see Wifi LAN's delivering broadly the throughputs mentioned in this article in real world installations - i've been personally involved with 4x such installations so far this year. They are all delivering reliable service at the throughputs mentioned above.

All the best

Andy

[Marie.O]

ok.