Running STV Server on Two PCs?

[bits]

I have two PCs that I use as PVRs(not HTPC). I currently have STV Server software installed on one of them and BTV on the other. The one with STV is the main PVR system and the BTV one is for recording shows where I have recording conflicts on the STV PC.

I stream all my recorded video to an HD200 upgraded to STVMC with comskip. The problem is that recordings made on the BTV system are not easily placed in the STV Recorded video folder in a way where they seamlessly integrate into the comskip feature.

So my question is whether it makes sense to purchase another license for STV server software and install on the BTV pc (BTV will be deleted). Will the Recorded video from both STV server PCs showup as though they were in one folder and will there be any conflicts?

Or would it be easier to install one of the TV tuner/cap devices in the BTV PC into the STV pc? I have two cap devices in the STV pc currently. A USB device for OTA and a PVR150 for cableone service via a STB. The BTV PC has a USB QAM cap device and a PVR250 via cable from the wall. Can STV handle more than two cap devices? Especially where two of them are DVICO Fusion USB devices?

[GKusnick]

Sage can handle as many capture devices as your hardware can support. (Whether two Fusion devices can peacefully coexist in your system I have no idea. I gave up on Fusion devices some time ago.) So by far the simplest setup is to put all your capture devices on one server running SageTV.

If that's not practical, you can set up a second machine as a network encoder to handle extra capture devices. This requires a second full SageTV license, but only one of the two machines will function as a SageTV server and manage all the recording tasks; the other just acts as a kind of LAN-enabled external enclosure for capture devices. See Appendix G of the manual for details.

(Terminology note: On these forums, "STV" means a loadable UI. The software product is typically called SageTV or just Sage.)

[paulbeers]

SageTV can handle as many tuners as your system can handle. So if possible, you could put them all on your Sage server. Like I said, it all depends on your server. The other option is to set your BTV server up as a Sage Network Encoder (which does require another STV licence). A Network Encoder then basically acts like a slave computer to your main Sage server. To your clients, it would be as if they are one big server, but your Sage Server would know.

Personally, if at all possible, try to get everything to one computer and be done with it (a lot less complex and cheaper), but if that isn't an alternative then definitely go the network encoder route.

[stlbearboy]

I currently have 9 capture devices hooked up in my server.
3 HDPVRs
1 Hauppague 1600
2 Hauppage 950s
2 Avermedia A180s
1 Avermedia Dual ATSC/QAM

If Sage supports it, and you have the slot for it, you can add it.

[bits]

I will try adding the other FusionHDTV QAM USB device and see if it can co-exist with the other FusionHDTV USB device. If it can then I am good to go. Thanks to all for the input!

On a side note; what is the secret to getting the HDPVR working with STV? I have lately been toying with the idea of getting one but I continue to see posts where there seem to be problems with STV+HDPVR.

[sic0048]

It seems that the HD-PVR is sensitive to USB chipsets, and broadcast quality among other things. That being said, there are a lot of us out there with very stable HD-PVR setups.

Initially the hardware had an overheating issue. That has since been fixed by Hauppauge, but many were quick to blame all their problems on the HD-PVR hardware due to this initial issue. Now that it has been out a while, I think people are realizing that many issues they might have are probably not HD-PVR hardware issues, but some other problem. I think there has been a lot of progress over the last 6 months or so with people working through these other issues and sharing their experiences - to the good of the community.

Check out the thread listed in my signature as an example. I know there are several people with very stable systems that did NOT follow these steps, so I wouldn't call it a requirement. But I also know there are lots of people that have been helped out by following these steps.

[sic0048]

Originally Posted by bits

I will try adding the other FusionHDTV QAM USB device and see if it can co-exist with the other FusionHDTV USB device. If it can then I am good to go. Thanks to all for the input!

If you cannot get the two USB tuners to work together, then I would suggest that you look at the HDHomeRun dual network tuner. It is more expensive than buying a 2nd Sage license, but not having two run two computers will help offset the cost in the long run. Sell the USB tuners on EBay (or at least 1 tuner) to help recover even more of the differnce. The HDHomeRun is one of the most stable tuners out there IMHO.

[bits]

Originally Posted by sic0048

It seems that the HD-PVR is sensitive to USB chipsets, and broadcast quality among other things. That being said, there are a lot of us out there with very stable HD-PVR setups.

Initially the hardware had an overheating issue. That has since been fixed by Hauppauge, but many were quick to blame all their problems on the HD-PVR hardware due to this initial issue. Now that it has been out a while, I think people are realizing that many issues they might have are probably not HD-PVR hardware issues, but some other problem. I think there has been a lot of progress over the last 6 months or so with people working through these other issues and sharing their experiences - to the good of the community.

Check out the thread listed in my signature as an example. I know there are several people with very stable systems that did NOT follow these steps, so I wouldn't call it a requirement. But I also know there are lots of people that have been helped out by following these steps.

I will take a look at your guide regarding the HD PVR. The HD PVR is a single tuner with possible issues and a somewhat more complicated setup but it provides the 'analog' hole. The HDHomeRun is stable, provides two tuners, is cheaper but only has coax inputs. Hmmmm.......tough decision.....BTW can it record two different shows simultaneously(natively encode both) provided one input is from the wall(QAM) and the other from a STB (I have cable)

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by bits

I will take a look at your guide regarding the HD PVR. The HD PVR is a single tuner with possible issues and a somewhat more complicated setup but it provides the 'analog' hole. The HDHomeRun is stable, provides two tuners, is cheaper but only has coax inputs. Hmmmm.......tough decision.....BTW can it record two different shows simultaneously(natively encode both) provided one input is from the wall(QAM) and the other from a STB (I have cable)

Are you asking about the HD-PVR, or the HDHomeRun? the HD-PVR can record ONE at a time, from a STB. The HDHomeRun can record 2 Digital broadcasts at a time (they CAN be from different sources, but must be Digital, and unencrypted (Clear QAM or ATSC). The HDHomeRun cannot be conencted to a STB (as they don't output QAM or ATSC).

[graywolf]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

If that's not practical, you can set up a second machine as a network encoder to handle extra capture devices. This requires a second full SageTV license, but only one of the two machines will function as a SageTV server and manage all the recording tasks; the other just acts as a kind of LAN-enabled external enclosure for capture devices. See Appendix G of the manual for details.

Maybe a silly question but was wondering.
If you set up the 2nd machine as a network encoder and for some reason the Primary machine went down/failed, would the second machine automatically take over?

[bits]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Are you asking about the HD-PVR, or the HDHomeRun? the HD-PVR can record ONE at a time, from a STB. The HDHomeRun can record 2 Digital broadcasts at a time (they CAN be from different sources, but must be Digital, and unencrypted (Clear QAM or ATSC). The HDHomeRun cannot be conencted to a STB (as they don't output QAM or ATSC).

I was asking about both since both have been suggested in this thread. You answered my question quite nicely...thank you. In your opinion is the HD PVR a good option in terms of reliability and quality of recording?

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by graywolf

If you set up the 2nd machine as a network encoder and for some reason the Primary machine went down/failed, would the second machine automatically take over?

No. It would continue to run in network encoder mode, waiting for the primary server to come back up and reconnect to it.

[sic0048]

Originally Posted by bits

I was asking about both since both have been suggested in this thread. You answered my question quite nicely...thank you. In your opinion is the HD PVR a good option in terms of reliability and quality of recording?

I think the quality of recording is just fine. HD shows recorded with the HD-PVR will look like HD shows. While there might be a slight degradation of the signal due to the digital to analog to digital conversion, it is very slight. The average user will not notice the difference. If there is a large difference in quality between the recordings and original broadcast, then something is set up wrong (ie SageTV isn't recording at the highest quality, etc).

HD-PVR reliability.... for a lot of people (I'd guess for most people...), the HD-PVR is very stable. For others it is very unstable. I'm afraid I cannot sugar coat it or even try to predict which camp you would fall into. But I think eventually most people end up with a stable system (but may want to break the HD-PVR during the debugging process). I don't want to scare you into thinking that the HD-PVR is terrible because it is not.

[bits]

Originally Posted by sic0048

I think the quality of recording is just fine. HD shows recorded with the HD-PVR will look like HD shows. While there might be a slight degradation of the signal due to the digital to analog to digital conversion, it is very slight. The average user will not notice the difference. If there is a large difference in quality between the recordings and original broadcast, then something is set up wrong (ie SageTV isn't recording at the highest quality, etc).

HD-PVR reliability.... for a lot of people (I'd guess for most people...), the HD-PVR is very stable. For others it is very unstable. I'm afraid I cannot sugar coat it or even try to predict which camp you would fall into. But I think eventually most people end up with a stable system (but may want to break the HD-PVR during the debugging process). I don't want to scare you into thinking that the HD-PVR is terrible because it is not.

After thinking about it a bit more the HD PVR would not be a good choice for me at this time primarily because I am not ready to replace two of my older network media players that do not play h264. A secondary reason is that I do not want to lose or impair the comskip stvi.

Everyone who posted has been very helpful and I am thankful.

Regarding the HD HomeRun; does it use up much network bandwidth when recording? At peek viewing times, which usually corresponds to peak recording times, my network is pretty heavily used and I am not sure it can handle the loss of additional bandwidth. My STV server PC has two LAN cable inputs so I was wondering if I could connect the HD HomeRun directly to the server PC via LAN cable.

[Fuzzy]

Comskip (the donater version) supports processing the H.264 files, as does ShowAnalyser 1.0, so you would not have to give up that feature going with the HD-PVR.

As for HDHomeRun bandwidth, it basically send the exact stream being broadcast. For ATSC, this max's out at about 19.5bps per channel (which might be broken up into different sub-channels). QAM has a higher max, but I doubt any cable operator is using a whole channel for a single channel, so it'd be probably a fraction of that.

[bits]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

Comskip (the donater version) supports processing the H.264 files, as does ShowAnalyser 1.0, so you would not have to give up that feature going with the HD-PVR.

As for HDHomeRun bandwidth, it basically send the exact stream being broadcast. For ATSC, this max's out at about 19.5bps per channel (which might be broken up into different sub-channels). QAM has a higher max, but I doubt any cable operator is using a whole channel for a single channel, so it'd be probably a fraction of that.

I thought that I had seen a few posts regarding the difficulty both comskip and SA were having with h264.....I will do a search and look more closely.

Thanks

[nick_l]

Originally Posted by bits

Regarding the HD HomeRun; does it use up much network bandwidth when recording? At peek viewing times, which usually corresponds to peak recording times, my network is pretty heavily used and I am not sure it can handle the loss of additional bandwidth. My STV server PC has two LAN cable inputs so I was wondering if I could connect the HD HomeRun directly to the server PC via LAN cable.

Can you define pretty heavily used? Are you running 100meg or 1gig networking equipment? Are you using a switch or a hub? With a switch only the traffic meant for a specific device is sent to that device, so your only likely bottleneck could be your Sage server, though unlikely. If you have two separate NICs (network interfaces) for your server you could actually hook it up to two separate ports on your switch for (theoretically) double the available bandwith. You would have to do a little research on how well Sage deals with multihomed machines however, as Ive never needed to try it so I dont know.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by bits

My STV server PC has two LAN cable inputs so I was wondering if I could connect the HD HomeRun directly to the server PC via LAN cable.

Yes, but there is a slight chance you will need a network switch on the new net.

See my sig. The 2 AMD MBs play just fine with the built in ethernet attached direct to the HDHR, but the Nvidia MB built in NIC, and the Intel NICs want a switch between them and the HDHR. (but no other software configuration needed)

[Fuzzy]

It's probably not a matter of needing a switch, but neednig a crossover cable. Some NIC's have built-in detection to determine if it is conencted to a switch/hub or a device, and switch send and receive leads appropriately (sometimes called Auto MDI/MDIX). Some don't. the ones that don't, you can use a crossover cable to make it work.

[nyplayer]

The HdHomerun does not need a crossover cable set the IP of the nic to 169.254.5.12 subnet 255.255.0.0 and the HDHomerun will get an IP this is documented in the HDHomerun install.

http://www.silicondust.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4088