Jump to content
deganza

Required bandwidth for 1000 Users

Recommended Posts

deganza

Hi

 

I know this is a difficult question to answer but do someone has experience with a large audience?

 

For example if there are 1'000 users which are watching at the same time a Live-TV programm in HD, how big must be the required bandwith?

 

If the streaming would be 6 Mbps and the bandwidht 1 Gbps, than is it just 1'000 / 6 = 167 ? Or is there some optimisation in emby?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luke

@@pir8radio do you have any tips on this? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pir8radio

Hi

 

I know this is a difficult question to answer but do someone has experience with a large audience?

 

For example if there are 1'000 users which are watching at the same time a Live-TV programm in HD, how big must be the required bandwith?

 

If the streaming would be 6 Mbps and the bandwidht 1 Gbps, than is it just 1'000 / 6 = 167 ? Or is there some optimisation in emby?

 

1000 users at 6mbps would put you around 5.72Gbps bandwidth.   emby does not do any optimization.    There is no way around that on the internet without a VPN.  If all 1000 users were on a common private vpn with your server you could do multicast and the server would only see 6mpbs for all 1k users, but the vpn network would still see 5.7gbps.   

 

This is not the platform to use for an iptv service if that's what you are thinking....

 

calculate bandwidth here: https://www.techex.co.uk/streaming-calculator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

1000 users at 6mbps would put you around 5.72Gbps bandwidth.   emby does not do any optimization.    There is no way around that on the internet without a VPN.  If all 1000 users were on a common private vpn with your server you could do multicast and the server would only see 6mpbs for all 1k users, but the vpn network would still see 5.7gbps.   

 

This is not the platform to use for an iptv service if that's what you are thinking....

 

calculate bandwidth here: https://www.techex.co.uk/streaming-calculator

 

thank you pir8radio!

 

Why using a private VPN? The Live-TV channels are already on multicast. 

 

Which solution are in use at telco-companies to serve such a lot uf users?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pir8radio

thank you pir8radio!

 

Why using a private VPN? The Live-TV channels are already on multicast. 

 

Which solution are in use at telco-companies to serve such a lot uf users?

 

Multicast doesn't work over the internet, it has to be a private network, which is why i say private vpn.      Telco-companies are technically a private network, so multicast works for them, they have control of all of their routing and equipment, its just one big private network connected to the internet backbone.   

Edited by pir8radio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

Multicast doesn't work over the internet, it has to be a private network, which is why i say private vpn.      Telco-companies are technically a private network, so multicast works for them, they have control of all of their routing and equipment, its just one big private network connected to the internet backbone.   

 

But with tvheadend as tvserver I'm able to stream live-tv with a low bandwidth to a lot of clients.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pir8radio

But with tvheadend as tvserver I'm able to stream live-tv with a low bandwidth to a lot of clients.

Probably low bandwidth source channels or output. Can’t be multicast to external internet clients.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

Probably low bandwidth source channels or output. Can’t be multicast to external internet clients.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

ok, so for 1000 clients I would need an 5.7 Gbps connection more or less.

But how do the telco-companies accomplish to handle over 1000 unicast clients?

Do they replicate the server?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scb99

I don’t know for which telco you speak, but for me where I live the telco can of course multicast because it’s all their network, from their server to me (and everyone else).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pir8radio

ok, so for 1000 clients I would need an 5.7 Gbps connection more or less.

But how do the telco-companies accomplish to handle over 1000 unicast clients?

Do they replicate the server?

Like I said before it’s a private network from them to customer. Imagine your home network, it sits behind a router/firewall might connect to a switch that connects to your pc, your pc can surf the net and stream tv. Now Imagine you have a 1000 port switch and you run a cable to 1000 houses. You can do multicast because you own the router and switch and your server sits on that private network. That’s what the telco does. They shouldn’t be using Unicast the resources needed wouldn’t be worth it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by pir8radio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

Like I said before it’s a private network from them to customer. Imagine your home network, it sits behind a router/firewall might connect to a switch that connects to your pc, your pc can surf the net and stream tv. Now Imagine you have a 1000 port switch and you run a cable to 1000 houses. You can do multicast because you own the router and switch and your server sits on that private network. That’s what the telco does. They shouldn’t be using Unicast the resources needed wouldn’t be worth it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I mean that some telcos provide also catch-up or replay-tv. So they have to use also Unicast or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Swynol

multicast packets are normally limited to to the same subnet. there are ways to pass them onto other subnets but its not worth the hassle. As pir8radio says if its multicast you need then this isnt the solution.

 

another possible solution is hosting on a cloud service that offers load balancing. something like azure or aws. this would have the benefit of geolocation for your users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
notla49285

another possible solution is hosting on a cloud service that offers load balancing. something like azure or aws. this would have the benefit of geolocation for your users.

 

Azure/AWS would be an absolute dream to run on, but would this not cause an issue with, let's say, some of the type of content that is held on Emby servers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spaceboy

Azure/AWS would be an absolute dream to run on, but would this not cause an issue with, let's say, some of the type of content that is held on Emby servers?

not if it’s encrypted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

multicast packets are normally limited to to the same subnet. there are ways to pass them onto other subnets but its not worth the hassle. As pir8radio says if its multicast you need then this isnt the solution.

 

another possible solution is hosting on a cloud service that offers load balancing. something like azure or aws. this would have the benefit of geolocation for your users.

 

ok, thank you. But If I would have a bandwidth of 10Gbps the I could server easily more than 1000 clients?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pir8radio

ok, thank you. But If I would have a bandwidth of 10Gbps the I could server easily more than 1000 clients?

 

Bandwidth only, yea.    But there are hardware and other limitations you have to think about too.  Its a rabbit hole....     For example if you have 1000 iptv channels and 1000 customers, if all 1000 customers are watching the same IPTV channel you will have one 6mbps stream into emby, and 1000 out to users, thats 1001 6mbps streams...   lets say those 1000 customers were all watching DIFFERENT channels, now you have 1000 6mbps iptv streams into your server and 1000 streams out thats 2000 6mbps streams you couldnt support that on 10gbps.     not to mention the hardware requirements, those 1000 streams would still be writing and reading to/from disk, you need an array that could handle 10gbps throughput, (this is another reason why emby shouldn't be used for a "service".)  the 10gbps interface will need to be a good card with offloading, Multiple physical CPU's to spread that 10gbps across.   There is no easy answer as you said in your first post.   

 

But good luck...      :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

Bandwidth only, yea.    But there are hardware and other limitations you have to think about too.  Its a rabbit hole....     For example if you have 1000 iptv channels and 1000 customers, if all 1000 customers are watching the same IPTV channel you will have one 6mbps stream into emby, and 1000 out to users, thats 1001 6mbps streams...   lets say those 1000 customers were all watching DIFFERENT channels, now you have 1000 6mbps iptv streams into your server and 1000 streams out thats 2000 6mbps streams you couldnt support that on 10gbps.     not to mention the hardware requirements, those 1000 streams would still be writing and reading to/from disk, you need an array that could handle 10gbps throughput, (this is another reason why emby shouldn't be used for a "service".)  the 10gbps interface will need to be a good card with offloading, Multiple physical CPU's to spread that 10gbps across.   There is no easy answer as you said in your first post.   

 

But good luck...      :)

 

so Middleware like Flussonic or Stalker is better situated for this task?

What about tvheadend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pir8radio

so Middleware like Flussonic or Stalker is better situated for this task?

What about tvheadend?

Yes flusonic is pretty good. One of the recent providers that went offline were using flusonic. Stalker is even better. You could prob use emby for vod but emby doesn’t support that use case and would probably drop/ban you. You would have to ask them. Emby doesn’t support piracy, but if your vod videos were not copyrighted or you were licensed, they would be cool with that. I’m just an end user of emby and I do not represent emby.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

Yes flusonic is pretty good. One of the recent providers that went offline were using flusonic. Stalker is even better. You could prob use emby for vod but emby doesn’t support that use case and would probably drop/ban you. You would have to ask them. Emby doesn’t support piracy, but if your vod videos were not copyrighted or you were licensed, they would be cool with that. I’m just an end user of emby and I do not represent emby.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

For the extended Emby Premiere Licence there is an option for 1000 devices:

 

https://emby.media/premiere-ext.html

 

So emby should handle this quantity of clients.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darkassassin07

There's a very big difference between allowing a total of 1000 clients to be able to access the server on a single license, and actually supporting 1000 simultaneous streams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

There's a very big difference between allowing a total of 1000 clients to be able to access the server on a single license, and actually supporting 1000 simultaneous streams.

 

yes, but it's theoretically possible that 1000 clients who access the server wants to watch a movie at the same time.

But it's more a limitation of emby or of the used hardware like pir8radio described above?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darkassassin07

Considering embys server software has been designed, built, and tested for use by a single household of around 1-25 users. It's a really difficult question to answer without actually trying it to see how it works out.

 

Assuming you had the hardware capabilities to support that amount of clients; I don't immediately see why it wouldn't work, but as far as I know, Emby hasn't been tested to that extreme of a use-case. (I'm also just an end-user though)

 

 

 

 

I don't think there is much more of an answer to give until we actually put it to the test.

 

 

IMHO, you should probably look for a solution thats designed and built to be able to handle this type of use if you really wanted to serve that large a client list. But that's me. Better to use something purpose-built for a task instead of re-moulding something built for a different use.

Edited by darkassassin07

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

Considering embys server software has been designed, built, and tested for use by a single household of around 1-25 users. It's a really difficult question to answer without actually trying it to see how it works out.

 

Assuming you had the hardware capabilities to support that amount of clients; I don't immediately see why it wouldn't work, but as far as I know, Emby hasn't been tested to that extreme of a use-case. (I'm also just an end-user though)

 

 

 

 

I don't think there is much more of an answer to give until we actually put it to the test.

 

 

IMHO, you should probably look for a solution thats designed and built to be able to handle this type of use if you really wanted to serve that large a client list. But that's me. Better to use something purpose-built for a task instead of re-moulding something built for a different use.

 

ok, thank you very much for your feedback! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mklitgaard

Another aspect is that theoretically what happend when you have 1000 clients who access the server there wants to watch content at same time, clients will install Emby on more and more devices, like tv, Mobile, might have different Computers and different browsers, so calulate 5 device per each high end user/clients, that will give you potentially 200 clients per 1000 clients accounts, so basiclly 1000 clients on Emby can/will easyli be cooked down to 200 clients, Fair to say Emby is not build for many clients, its more over a home solution for single household, i Dont even know the price of 1000 Clients.


Edited by Mklitgaard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deganza

 

Another aspect is that theoretically what happend when you have 1000 clients who access the server there wants to watch content at same time, clients will install Emby on more and more devices, like tv, Mobile, might have different Computers and different browsers, so calulate 5 device per each high end user/clients, that will give you potentially 200 clients per 1000 clients accounts, so basiclly 1000 clients on Emby can/will easyli be cooked down to 200 clients, Fair to say Emby is not build for many clients, its more over a home solution for single household, i Dont even know the price of 1000 Clients.

 

 

Never mind. I'm looking for another solution.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...