
Recherche avancée
Autres articles (26)
-
Déploiements possibles
31 janvier 2010, parDeux types de déploiements sont envisageable dépendant de deux aspects : La méthode d’installation envisagée (en standalone ou en ferme) ; Le nombre d’encodages journaliers et la fréquentation envisagés ;
L’encodage de vidéos est un processus lourd consommant énormément de ressources système (CPU et RAM), il est nécessaire de prendre tout cela en considération. Ce système n’est donc possible que sur un ou plusieurs serveurs dédiés.
Version mono serveur
La version mono serveur consiste à n’utiliser qu’une (...) -
Creating farms of unique websites
13 avril 2011, parMediaSPIP platforms can be installed as a farm, with a single "core" hosted on a dedicated server and used by multiple websites.
This allows (among other things) : implementation costs to be shared between several different projects / individuals rapid deployment of multiple unique sites creation of groups of like-minded sites, making it possible to browse media in a more controlled and selective environment than the major "open" (...) -
Contribute to documentation
13 avril 2011Documentation is vital to the development of improved technical capabilities.
MediaSPIP welcomes documentation by users as well as developers - including : critique of existing features and functions articles contributed by developers, administrators, content producers and editors screenshots to illustrate the above translations of existing documentation into other languages
To contribute, register to the project users’ mailing (...)
Sur d’autres sites (6538)
-
Anomalie #1876 : Non prise en compte des guillemets dans le surlignage
14 juin 2011, par cedric -voir aussi #2025
-
CD-R Read Speed Experiments
21 mai 2011, par Multimedia Mike — Science Projects, Sega DreamcastI want to know how fast I can really read data from a CD-R. Pursuant to my previous musings on this subject, I was informed that it is inadequate to profile reading just any file from a CD-R since data might be read faster or slower depending on whether the data is closer to the inside or the outside of the disc.
Conclusion / Executive Summary
It is 100% true that reading data from the outside of a CD-R is faster than reading data from the inside. Read on if you care to know the details of how I arrived at this conclusion, and to find out just how much speed advantage there is to reading from the outside rather than the inside.Science Project Outline
- Create some sample CD-Rs with various properties
- Get a variety of optical drives
- Write a custom program that profiles the read speed
Creating The Test Media
It’s my understanding that not all CD-Rs are created equal. Fortunately, I have 3 spindles of media handy : Some plain-looking Memorex discs, some rather flamboyant Maxell discs, and those 80mm TDK discs :
My approach for burning is to create a single file to be burned into a standard ISO-9660 filesystem. The size of the file will be the advertised length of the CD-R minus 1 megabyte for overhead— so, 699 MB for the 120mm discs, 209 MB for the 80mm disc. The file will contain a repeating sequence of 0..0xFF bytes.
Profiling
I don’t want to leave this to the vagaries of any filesystem handling layer so I will conduct this experiment at the sector level. Profiling program outline :- Read the CD-ROM TOC and get the number of sectors that comprise the data track
- Profile reading the first 20 MB of sectors
- Profile reading 20 MB of sectors in the middle of the track
- Profile reading the last 20 MB of sectors
Unfortunately, I couldn’t figure out the raw sector reading on modern Linux incarnations (which is annoying since I remember it being pretty straightforward years ago). So I left it to the filesystem after all. New algorithm :
- Open the single, large file on the CD-R and query the file length
- Profile reading the first 20 MB of data, 512 kbytes at a time
- Profile reading 20 MB of sectors in the middle of the track (starting from filesize / 2 - 10 MB), 512 kbytes at a time
- Profile reading the last 20 MB of sectors (starting from filesize - 20MB), 512 kbytes at a time
Empirical Data
I tested the program in Linux using an LG Slim external multi-drive (seen at the top of the pile in this post) and one of my Sega Dreamcast units. I gathered the median value of 3 runs for each area (inner, middle, and outer). I also conducted a buffer flush in between Linux runs (as root :'sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches'
).LG Slim external multi-drive (reading from inner, middle, and outer areas in kbytes/sec) :
- TDK-80mm : 721, 897, 1048
- Memorex-120mm : 1601, 2805, 3623
- Maxell-120mm : 1660, 2806, 3624
So the 120mm discs can range from about 10.5X all the way up to a full 24X on this drive. For whatever reason, the 80mm disc fares a bit worse — even at the inner track — with a range of 4.8X - 7X.
Sega Dreamcast (reading from inner, middle, and outer areas in kbytes/sec) :
- TDK-80mm : 502, 632, 749
- Memorex-120mm : 499, 889, 1143
- Maxell-120mm : 500, 890, 1156
It’s interesting that the 80mm disc performed comparably to the 120mm discs in the Dreamcast, in contrast to the LG Slim drive. Also, the results are consistent with my previous profiling experiments, which largely only touched the inner area. The read speeds range from 3.3X - 7.7X. The middle of a 120mm disc reads at about 6X.
Implications
A few thoughts regarding these results :- Since the very definition of 1X is the minimum speed necessary to stream data from an audio CD, then presumably, original 1X CD-ROM drives would have needed to be capable of reading 1X from the inner area. I wonder what the max read speed at the outer edges was ? It’s unlikely I would be able to get a 1X drive working easily in this day and age since the earliest CD-ROM drives required custom controllers.
- I think 24X is the max rated read speed for CD-Rs, at least for this drive. This implies that the marketing literature only cites the best possible numbers. I guess this is no surprise, similar to how monitors and TVs have always been measured by their diagonal dimension.
- Given this data, how do you engineer an ISO-9660 filesystem image so that the timing-sensitive multimedia files live on the outermost track ? In the Dreamcast case, if you can guarantee your FMV files will live somewhere between the middle and the end of the disc, you should be able to count on a bitrate of at least 900 kbytes/sec.
Source Code
Here is the program I wrote for profiling. Note that the filename is hardcoded (#define FILENAME
). Compiling for Linux is a simple'gcc -Wall profile-cdr.c -o profile-cdr'
. Compiling for Dreamcast is performed in the standard KallistiOS manner (people skilled in the art already know what they need to know) ; the only variation is to compile with the'-D_arch_dreamcast'
flag, which the default KOS environment adds anyway.C :-
#ifdef _arch_dreamcast
-
#include <kos .h>
-
-
/* map I/O functions to their KOS equivalents */
-
#define open fs_open
-
#define lseek fs_seek
-
#define read fs_read
-
#define close fs_close
-
-
#define FILENAME "/cd/bigfile"
-
#else
-
#include <stdio .h>
-
#include <sys /types.h>
-
#include </sys><sys /stat.h>
-
#include </sys><sys /time.h>
-
#include <fcntl .h>
-
#include <unistd .h>
-
-
#define FILENAME "/media/Full disc/bigfile"
-
#endif
-
-
/* Get a current absolute millisecond count ; it doesn’t have to be in
-
* reference to anything special. */
-
unsigned int get_current_milliseconds()
-
{
-
#ifdef _arch_dreamcast
-
return timer_ms_gettime64() ;
-
#else
-
struct timeval tv ;
-
gettimeofday(&tv, NULL) ;
-
return tv.tv_sec * 1000 + tv.tv_usec / 1000 ;
-
#endif
-
}
-
-
#define READ_SIZE (20 * 1024 * 1024)
-
#define READ_BUFFER_SIZE (512 * 1024)
-
-
int main()
-
{
-
int i, j ;
-
int fd ;
-
char read_buffer[READ_BUFFER_SIZE] ;
-
off_t filesize ;
-
unsigned int start_time, end_time ;
-
-
fd = open(FILENAME, O_RDONLY) ;
-
if (fd == -1)
-
{
-
return 1 ;
-
}
-
filesize = lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_END) ;
-
-
for (i = 0 ; i <3 ; i++)
-
{
-
if (i == 0)
-
{
-
lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET) ;
-
}
-
else if (i == 1)
-
{
-
lseek(fd, (filesize / 2) - (READ_SIZE / 2), SEEK_SET) ;
-
}
-
else
-
{
-
lseek(fd, filesize - READ_SIZE, SEEK_SET) ;
-
}
-
/* read 20 MB ; 40 chunks of 1/2 MB */
-
start_time = get_current_milliseconds() ;
-
for (j = 0 ; j <(READ_SIZE / READ_BUFFER_SIZE) ; j++)
-
if (read(fd, read_buffer, READ_BUFFER_SIZE) != READ_BUFFER_SIZE)
-
{
-
break ;
-
}
-
end_time = get_current_milliseconds() ;
-
end_time, start_time, end_time - start_time,
-
READ_SIZE / (end_time - start_time)) ;
-
}
-
-
close(fd) ;
-
-
return 0 ;
-
}
-
Gallery of VP8 Encoding Naivete
15 octobre 2010, par Multimedia Mike — VP8I’ve been toiling away as a multimedia technology generalist for so long that it’s easy for me to forget that not everyone is as versed in the minutiae of the domain as I am. But I recently experienced what it’s like to be such an outsider when I posted about my toy VP8 encoder, expressing that it’s one of the hardest things I have ever tried to do. I heard of from number of people who do have extensive experience in video encoding, particularly with the H.264 and VP8 codecs. Their reactions were predictable : What’s so hard ? Look, you might be a little too immersed in the area to really understand a relative beginner’s perspective.
And to all the people who suggested that I should get the encoder into FFmpeg ASAP : Are you crazy ?! Did you see what the first pass of the encoder produced ? Do you have lower standards than even I do ?
Not Giving Up
I worked a little more on the toy encoder. Remember that the above image is what I’m hoping to encode somewhat faithfully for this experiment. In my first pass, I attempted vertical prediction for all planes. For my next pass, I forced the chroma planes to mid-level (which results in a greyscale image) and played with the 16×16 luma prediction modes. When implementing an extremely naive algorithm to decide which 16×16 prediction mode would be the best for a particular block, this is what the program produced :
For fun, here is what the image encodes to when forcing various prediction modes :
I think the DC-only prediction mode actually looks a little better than the image that the naive algorithm produced :
Vertical 16×16 prediction, similar to the image from the last post (just in black and white) :
Horizontal 16×16 prediction :
This is the 16×16 prediction mode unique to VP8, the TrueMotion mode (based on On2/Duck’s very first video codec) :
Wow, these encodings really bring down the cheerful tone of the original image.
Next Steps
I have little reason to believe that I am encoding and subsequently reconstructing the image correctly (i.e., error is likely propagating through the entire encoding). If I have time, the next step is to validate my reconstruction against the encoder. Then I need to get the entropy considerations correct so that I actually get some compression out of this format.