Sage Server on Windows 2003: Is it really feasible?

[sixdoubleo]

I haven't seen much information (at least searching for "2003 server" doesn't turn up much) on running SageTV on a Windows 2003 Server.

Is it worth trying to get my sage server running under 2003 or should I stick with XP? I have one very minor issue with running XP (DFS incompatibilty) but it's not big enough that I MUST use 2003. What is the consensus on using 2003 Server?

Can anybody comment on the following?

Codec: Does the Hauppauge codec work correctly with Windows 2003 Server?

2 PVR250's: I saw someone say they couldnt get 2 PVR-250's to work with 2003 server. True?

USB-UIRT: I'll be controlling 2 boxes via the multizone capability of the USBUIRT. Does this work with 2003?

SageMVP: Since this runs in user space, I assume this wont work correctly, right? (Unless course I physically log in to the server and start a Sage instance) Will Frey's upcoming implementation of the "extender" work with 2003?

General Performance: Are there any perfromance problems?

Thanks for any assistance.

Does Frey have an official position/recommendation on what platform to run a Sage Server on?

[stanger89]

I've got Server 2003 running my server. Been flawless so far, but note that it's a headless server, for recording only. I run Client on my HTPC.

[salsbst]

I haven't had any problems running SageTV on Win2k3.

Codec: Does the Hauppauge codec work correctly with Windows 2003 Server?

Never tried that codec.

2 PVR250's: I saw someone say they couldnt get 2 PVR-250's to work with 2003 server. True?

No problem here -- I have 2 250s on my Win2k3 server.

USB-UIRT: I'll be controlling 2 boxes via the multizone capability of the USBUIRT. Does this work with 2003?

I only control one cable STB on the server, it works fines.

General Performance: Are there any perfromance problems?

Not for me.

[sixdoubleo]

Originally Posted by stanger89

but note that it's a headless server

Is there any other kind of server?

Thanks for the feedback. Maybe I'll give 2k3 a go for my Sage rebuild.

[that_kid]

Glad I ran across this thread. I was thinking about doing the same thing. When I switch over to server 2k3 can I just copy sage.properties and my wiz.bin file to the new server and have all my settings back or is it best that I do it all from scratch?

[zjennings]

I ran SageTV on a 2k3 box, connected directly to my TV. It worked perfectly. Except for one thing that took me a while to figure out. Here it is...

Turn Video Hardware Acceleration all the way up!

By default, on 2k3, it's turned all the way down and therefore wont do much of anything for you. It's should be on the "troubleshooting" tab of the advanced video properties window.

Let me know if you need any further assistance.

~zach

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by that_kid

Glad I ran across this thread. I was thinking about doing the same thing. When I switch over to server 2k3 can I just copy sage.properties and my wiz.bin file to the new server and have all my settings back or is it best that I do it all from scratch?

IIRC that's what I did. For some reason I can't remember doing it, but I didn't loose any recording info so I must have.

[jmiddleton]

Here is a link to an article on the adjustments you need to make to use Server 2003 as a workstation: http://www.msfn.org/win2k3/index.htm. I am running the latest Sage beta with a Hauppauge PVR-350 and an ATI ehome wonder - the system is rock solid.

[sixdoubleo]

Originally Posted by jmiddleton

Here is a link to an article on the adjustments you need to make to use Server 2003 as a workstation: http://www.msfn.org/win2k3/index.htm. I am running the latest Sage beta with a Hauppauge PVR-350 and an ATI ehome wonder - the system is rock solid.

Why do I need to adjust 2003 Server to run as a workstation? Even if I'm using Sage as a server ONLY?

Remember, this server sits in a closet and does nothing but record. I have clients throughout the house that do the watching.

Are these optimizations still needed in this case? This is why I was hoping for a comment from Frey. I know that Sage is called "Sage Server" but does it REALLY run as a background task? Given that it uses Java, and the JRE is run in user space, then would I want to optimize background tasks or foreground applications? WOuld this make XP the more ideal platfrom from a performance standpoint?

[stanger89]

I didn't do anything special and my 2003 server is humming along just fine. With the Sage service, nobody even needs to be logged in.

[AndyS]

[QUOTE]What is the consensus on using 2003 Server?
As with Stanger89 I've been running a headless server using 2003 Server for maybe 6 months now with zero problems.

Codec: Does the Hauppauge codec work correctly with Windows 2003 Server?

I've seen no problems with this codec.

2 PVR250's: I saw someone say they couldnt get 2 PVR-250's to work with 2003 server. True?

Not true. I have two PVR-250/16s and they work flawlessly.

USB-UIRT: I'll be controlling 2 boxes via the multizone capability of the USBUIRT. Does this work with 2003?

Can't comment directly as I don't use the USB-UIRT but there's absolutely no reason why this should not work.

SageMVP: Since this runs in user space, I assume this wont work correctly, right? (Unless course I physically log in to the server and start a Sage instance) Will Frey's upcoming implementation of the "extender" work with 2003?

I also installed SageClient on my Win2K3 server and installed Matt's SageMVP code on it and it runs flawlessly. It could also be run using the front-end that comes with SageTV. One thing to note is that you do need to be logged in, and the relevant front-end/client must be started before you can use the MVP. However, there are some tweaks available that could do an auto-login if you want to do that sort of thing (I chose to do a manual login/startup and it has worked fine for months).

General Performance: Are there any perfromance problems?

No performance problems noted. As it is a server-OS it is profiled for background processes so you should certainly run it as a service. I also run the Sage Web-Server on my service and it performs without a problem. Fast too.

Andy.

[sixdoubleo]

Thanks guys. That does it. I'll be rebuilding my Sage Server as a 2003 box. In doing so, I am going to move hardware around so that I can get a little bit more horsepower behind it. Basically here's the setup I'll have:

AMD Sempron 2400+
ECS KT333-based Motherboard (Can't remember the actual model, but Fry's runs the CPU+MB+Fan for $74.99 just about every other weekend)
512MB PC2700
Maxtor 300GB SATA Drive (12GB Partition for OS, 288GB for recordings-64K of course
Netgear Gigabit NIC
Radeon 7200 32MB
Integrated Audio
2 PVR-250's

That's about it. I know it's more than I need, but I have that MB/CPU that I was running as a backup server. I'll be shifting things around so that MB/CPU will become available.

Hopefully I'll work on it this weekend. I'll post a report when I get done...along with any tweaks/config changes, etc that I made.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by sixdoubleo

ECS KT333-based Motherboard

That would scare me, a lot. Especially in a server, there's no way I'd put an VIA chipset in there, definitely not if you plan on using multiple cards.

[sixdoubleo]

Originally Posted by stanger89

That would scare me, a lot. Especially in a server, there's no way I'd put an VIA chipset in there, definitely not if you plan on using multiple cards.

How so?

[stanger89]

http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...18&postcount=6
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...2&postcount=34
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...pset#post73691
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...pset#post39784
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...31&postcount=6
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...12&postcount=5
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...0&postcount=10

If I never see "4-in-1" again, I can die in peace.

I know there's more out there, but to summarize, VIA has a notoriously bad PCI implimentation, I'm still amazed they get any respect at all since it seems like the STILL, after 5-10 years, haven't fixed it. Everybody else seems to be perfectly capable of implimenting PCI correctly, why can't they?

[sixdoubleo]

Originally Posted by stanger89

http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...18&postcount=6
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...2&postcount=34
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...pset#post73691
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...pset#post39784
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...31&postcount=6
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...12&postcount=5
http://forums.sage.tv/forums/showthr...0&postcount=10

If I never see "4-in-1" again, I can die in peace.

I know there's more out there, but to summarize, VIA has a notoriously bad PCI implimentation, I'm still amazed they get any respect at all since it seems like the STILL, after 5-10 years, haven't fixed it. Everybody else seems to be perfectly capable of implimenting PCI correctly, why can't they?

Thanks for the threads. Well, we shall see. When you said that I did a search for "VIA chipset" and, while there were problems reported, I found a few people claiming no problems. Historically, I usually fall into that category. (Not taking anything away from those who did have problems....)

Hopefully my luck continues. If it has any problems, I have a couple other MB/CPU combo's I can use. The most likely PLan B will be an ECS K75S Pro w/Athlon 1800 (I think it's an SIS chipset). But it doesn't have SATA and I wanted to use my 300GB SATA drive.

[stanger89]

Let's just put it this way. If you're buying new, getting a VIA based board is asking for trouble. I long ago gave up on buying things "because they're cheaper", it just never pays off to give up something important (like a proven chipset). Out of the 8 or so PCs I've built, the only boards I've been happy with have been Abit boards, based on nForce or Intel chipsets.

[stanger89]

On the topic of "alternative OSs" ...

Anybody tried Sage on Windows XP 64-bit ?

[Opus4]

I wouldn't mind looking into it when I get around to building my dual Opteron system. (Uh... that would become my main work machine, not an HTPC.)

- Andy

[stanger89]

Well I'm downloading it now. We'll see when I get around to installing it.