[galets]

I have seen quite a few discussions on network buffering issues and no solution which addresses the fundamental problem, which is: network access could be flakey. Therefore I suggest a feature which would put those discussions to rest, hopefully forever.

Feature basically is: every media location should have an option to buffer content locally as it is played. From UI perspective, this will add a numeric control, which would tell how many megabytes should be buffered locally. Buffer should reside in file(s) on system temporary directory

Scenario where this feature is required: when a file is played over wifi or other unstable network. Wifi may have sufficient network throughput on average to play media file without skips or hiccups. However, the speed on wifi is variable, it could be fast, but then someone turns a microwave oven next to media center and speed goes down, movie pauses. Yes, this is a network issue, not a fault of XBMC. Yet XBMC could still be delivering flawless user experience, all that needs to be done is to buffer the media file it plays into local temporary file. This process should be done by a background thread and be transparent to user.

[GJones]

Or we could donate a CAT5 network line.

[CrashX]

Or we could donate a CAT5 network line.

[galets]

Or we could donate a CAT5 network line.

I am not sure why are you rejecting this idea. People run media centers on wifi links all the time, and it will definitely improve user experience. Isn't that what this forum is about? Please explain. If I'm wasting my time here, I would gladly go away, and spend it on something else

[davilla]

It might solve some but not all issues with a crappy wifi link. I can see it now, "I've set the magic buffer size to 1GB and I have to wait 30 mins to play the video, why?"

[tslayer]

I'm sure if you developed a great patch it may be accepted.

[tslayer]

What if you're defrosting your meat for like 10 minutes? Now your local buffer is gone!

[Flomaster]

when my media server is built and up and running I am going to make sure its hardwired and I'll upgrade my switch to a 1000 instead of my modems 100 connection

yeah im gonna have to run some cable and cut some holes in my walls, but its going to be worth it.


-=Jason=-

[davilla]

when my media server is built and up and running I am going to make sure its hardwired and I'll upgrade my switch to a 1000 instead of my modems 100 connection

yeah im gonna have to run some cable and cut some holes in my walls, but its going to be worth it.


-=Jason=-

It's well worth the effort, I designed my house that way, each room has not one but two network plates with conduit running up/down the walls. The Media room has six, one on each wall with two more in the equipment bay that's tucked in a wall adjoining the stairs. I do have wifi but that's for floating devices.

[Gorgula]

Well written post, horrible and useless responses. A better buffer system would be appreciated but I haven't looked into what the community is doing about it. Do you have any links to threads?

[prae5]

And there is reason why there is no such option or stupidly large buffers - it has been covered many many times. Search there are plenty of topics on this. Big buffers do not mean better playback - quite the opposite in many cases.

[tungmeister]

I don't really know how buffers work - not something i've ever looked into - but isn't it possible to basically just copy the file to a local location and open it and start playing as a sufficient part of the file is present, therefore in effect you're just copying the file and playing it as though it is a local file thus using all available bandwidth for transfer?

[spiff]

so waiting 10-15 mins before a movie starts is acceptable?

[prae5]

I don't really know how buffers work - not something i've ever looked into - but isn't it possible to basically just copy the file to a local location and open it and start playing as a sufficient part of the file is present, therefore in effect you're just copying the file and playing it as though it is a local file thus using all available bandwidth for transfer?

If your wifi can't handle streaming a file at an acceptable bitrate so you can watch it, would you be happy waiting 10-15mins+ for it to cache that to hard disk? What about when you want to rewind/fastforward - another 15min wait, then realise its not the right bit, another 15min wait.

Big buffers do not fix poor wifi.

If your network isn't capable of streaming content fast enough, xbmc should not have to fix this.

Wifi and streaming content do not play nice with each other, use a cable.

[tungmeister]

If your wifi can't handle streaming a file at an acceptable bitrate so you can watch it, would you be happy waiting 10-15mins+ for it to cache that to hard disk? What about when you want to rewind/fastforward - another 15min wait, then realise its not the right bit, another 15min wait.

Big buffers do not fix poor wifi.

If your network isn't capable of streaming content fast enough, xbmc should not have to fix this.

Wifi and streaming content do not play nice with each other, use a cable.

fair enough, hadn't really thought about rewind/fastforward, kind of breaks thought process don't have the issue myself I was just intrigued regarding how the buffering worked. Didint realise you'd need to have to copy the entire file before starting to watch it, figured it could just be copied and simultaneously opened for reading.