We need an archive function where we can assign a drive!

[jominor]

Well, I just lost a 250 gig Maxtor with a boatload of shows. I can tell you, YouTube and Google video support is not nearly as useful(to me anyway) as being able to easily move shows to a partition for compression and backup.

I humbly ask that this function's inclusion is reviewed.

[flavius]

Seconded. Some archive function that would allow us to control the storage would be great.

[korben_dallas]

thirded

[perfessor101]

either an archive function or a move_recording api call ...

[mattdcknsn]

I agree, this would be a BIG help.


oh, I fifthed

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by perfessor101

...or a move_recording api call ...

As far as APIs go, we already have DeleteFileWithoutPrejudice, AddMediaFile, and SetMediaFileAiring. Can't you do something with those?

[Opus4]

There is also a StartFileCopy() API call to check out, if that might help create a customization.

- Andy

[BobPhoenix]

And from a regular client you can use CopyToLocalFile to get this.

Edit: I knew there was a better option than CopyToLocalFile just couldn't remember the name.

[jominor]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

As far as APIs go, we already have DeleteFileWithoutPrejudice, AddMediaFile, and SetMediaFileAiring. Can't you do something with those?

If we can get Googlevideo and Youtube, why not an integrated feature implemented without the hassle. IMO, this would require at least a new plugin and would be something that people, again, IMO, would want out of the box.

It should be a setting. You define a folder as the archive folder. If you archive, the systems copies the file, updates the wizard.bin, verifies free space before copying, copying, and deleting. Oh, and a good rollback.

Unarchive should do the reverse, except prompt you to where you want the folder.

Of course, this would be trivial to do without a specific API if the wizard.bin was a text or DB and not a binary file.

The synergy would be tremendous when combined with the archive and compression functions.

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by jominor

If we can get Googlevideo and Youtube, why not an integrated feature implemented without the hassle. IMO, this would require at least a new plugin and would be something that people, again, IMO, would want out of the box.

I don't dispute this. But perfessor asked for an API, and we're pointing out that the necessary APIs already exist.

Of course, this would be trivial to do without a specific API if the wizard.bin was a text or DB and not a binary file.

I don't get this part. Sage.properties is text, but that doesn't make it trivial to modify. You have to stop Sage to edit it manually, or else go through the API and let Sage do the modification. Why would wiz.bin be any different?

[jominor]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

I don't dispute this. But perfessor asked for an API, and we're pointing out that the necessary APIs already exist.


I don't get this part. Sage.properties is text, but that doesn't make it trivial to modify. You have to stop Sage to edit it manually, or else go through the API and let Sage do the modification. Why would wiz.bin be any different?

A text file can be edited with any editor. Wiz.bin is a binary file with a format that is unknown and must be reversed engineered. An API would be needed to easily say, change the name of the file.

Currently, there appears to be a considerable amount of hoop jumping. If this data was stored in a database or text file, then simple jdbc calls or string manipulation can be performed even in the absence of specific APIs.

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by jominor

A text file can be edited with any editor.

Not while Sage is running. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you asking for a way to move files without shutting down Sage?

If this data was stored in a database or text file, then simple jdbc calls or string manipulation can be performed even in the absence of specific APIs.

But the APIs do exist, and they're not that much more complicated than simple jdbc or string functions. The part I'm not getting is why you think it would be safer or more reliable to go behind Sage's back to mess with wiz.bin directly instead of going through the APIs Sage has provided for that purpose.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here. I just don't see how hitching your simple feature request to something as radical as a wiz.bin format change is going to get you what you want in any reasonable time frame.

[jominor]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

Not while Sage is running. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you asking for a way to move files without shutting down Sage?


But the APIs do exist, and they're not that much more complicated than simple jdbc or string functions. The part I'm not getting is why you think it would be safer or more reliable to go behind Sage's back to mess with wiz.bin directly instead of going through the APIs Sage has provided for that purpose.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here. I just don't see how hitching your simple feature request to something as radical as a wiz.bin format change is going to get you what you want in any reasonable time frame.

I don't think you're picking a fight. We're just talking. I fully admit to "muddying" the waters a bit beyond my original request when we started talking about the API. I've always thought that a different format for the database would make it easier to implement or extend certain functions in Sage. For example, the Word doc binary format is a nightmare to figure out and interoperability is a hassle. I write java apps and people always want the output to eventually emit .docs. Therefore, I'm pretty excited out the xml format changes of office 2003 and better. It will make my life easier and I can stop using RTF as compromise.

Same, IMO, for the wiz.bin. I think that it would be easier to integrate with Sage if wiz.bin was something other than a binary file. Now, all that being said, I could be stuck in the past. This is been on my mind on and off for a while ever since hearing about Studio and its been a while(a long while) since I've looked at the API and I could be stuck in the past.

However, as it relates to the archive feature, I was lobbying more for an out of the box, than plugin or STV change.

[jlindborg]

Just as a side note, I've noticed in 6.x (I had not tested this for a while so they may not be new behavior) that I can move shows between drives while Sage is running without a problem.

I was feeling the pain on this as well since I record locally and move shows off to my NAS during the night - I had written a script to do this that involved shutting down the Sage service, moving files and then starting the service - from time to time this would jack up the serial control of my DirecTV boxes so I tried it without shutting down sage - works like a champ and has been for a few weeks now.

When I tested this last (well over a year ago) it caused all kinds of issues when I did this - now it seems to handle it fine. Should make implementing something along these lines pretty trivial.