Jump to content

unnecessary transcoding


Recommended Posts

Posted

OK, i looked at the web interface, (without changing the ruko app) and for a transcoding file i get this;

 

Media Info
Container mp4
Path /mytv/detectorists/series 2/Detectorists_Series_2_-_3._Episode_3_b06nxyd8_default.mp4
Size 310 MB

 

 

and for a non-transcoding file, i mostly get all this;

(same file encoding as above.)

(some non-transcoding files are also showing absolutely nothing, not even above info.)

 

Media Info
Video
CodecH264
ProfileMain
Level31
Resolution832x468
Aspect ratio16:9
AnamorphicNo
InterlacedNo
Framerate25
Bitrate1371 kbps
Bit depth8 bit
Pixel formatyuv420p
Ref frames2
CABACNo
Audio
Languageund
CodecAAC
ProfileLC
Layoutstereo
Channels2 ch
Bitrate91 kbps
Sample rate48000 khz
DefaultYes
Containermp4
Path/mytv/last kingdom/The_Last_Kingdom_-_6._Episode_6_b06qrbsr_default.mp4
Posted (edited)

@@psi, going strictly off that transcoding section this file should not be transcoding. The roku direct play profile should just let this happen. Maybe it isnt doing that? (O_o);; What version of the server are you using? There is something fishy going on here. Maybe we need a bigger boat? I mean.. *cue jaws music* .. I really mean, the problem doesn't appear to be your files. It is weird. Does this happen with any other files? Maybe it is because they arent properly identified as in, they dont get full metadata because the filenames arent fitting the norm. So your description is missing too. But this should not cause the server to neglect filling in the codec names. We may have to wait for @@Luke to follow up on this when he has time and see if he can find this white whale they call moby. A bigger boat indeed is required there. Last joke, I promise. Haw.. Trying to keep this light and keep it friendly. :)

Edited by speechles
Posted

Version 3.0.5781.4

 

i'll just try shortening the names and see what happens.

 

perhaps a sonic screwdriver?

Posted

wow, must have been the dr Who reference, but i worked!!!

 

i noticed the problem file was slightly longer at 53, than the other at only 47.

 

so a file name limit of 50 chars perhaps?

Posted

OK tried more files and they are all fixed, so no more crappy quality viewing.

 

but it doesn't appear to be just the length of file name, some i made longer but they still work, so i guess the name change caused a re-check and things worked the second time.

 

maybe its the initial scan, during setup, that goes wrong, then to trigger a re-check you have to rename, otherwise a rescan just assumes what it had already was right.

Posted

should add;  transcoding always stops when you get the long list of meta-data to appear, and files with only the short list always transcode.

Posted

 

OK, i looked at the web interface, (without changing the ruko app) and for a transcoding file i get this;

 

Media Info
Container mp4
Path /mytv/detectorists/series 2/Detectorists_Series_2_-_3._Episode_3_b06nxyd8_default.mp4
Size 310 MB

 

 

and for a non-transcoding file, i mostly get all this;

(same file encoding as above.)

(some non-transcoding files are also showing absolutely nothing, not even above info.)

 

Media Info
Video
CodecH264

ProfileMain

Level31

Resolution832x468

Aspect ratio16:9

AnamorphicNo

InterlacedNo

Framerate25

Bitrate1371 kbps

Bit depth8 bit

Pixel formatyuv420p

Ref frames2

CABACNo

Audio
Languageund

CodecAAC

ProfileLC

Layoutstereo

Channels2 ch

Bitrate91 kbps

Sample rate48000 khz

DefaultYes

Containermp4
Path/mytv/last kingdom/The_Last_Kingdom_-_6._Episode_6_b06qrbsr_default.mp4

 

 

This makes sense.  The files that we had no media information for were transcoded because we had no way of knowing otherwise.

 

Renaming the files caused them to be re-added and re-scanned which then got proper media info for them.  Refreshing them probably would have accomplished the same thing.

Posted

This makes sense.  The files that we had no media information for were transcoded because we had no way of knowing otherwise.

 

Renaming the files caused them to be re-added and re-scanned which then got proper media info for them.  Refreshing them probably would have accomplished the same thing.

 

OK, yes the conclusion i came to.

 

but what do you mean by "refreshing"

bluemonkey07
Posted (edited)

Select to refresh the item in the web client, rescans the item and metadata/mediainfo

Edited by Vidman
Posted

OK, found it and that worked.

 

so refresh re-scans, and that works, then why isn't the initial scan working? or the scan on startup, seems the fundamental issue.

 

i have repeatedly tried hitting the 'scan' command in the web interface to no avail.

 

also having to 'refresh' every file is certainly a bit clumsy.

 

just had to 'refresh' a file i added yesterday! that was happily in the libarary but without all the meta-data again.

Posted

A scan and a refresh are two different things.

 

A scan searches your entire library for anything that has changed since it was last refreshed and refreshes only those items.

 

A refresh actually refreshes the information.

 

So, if those items hadn't changed in some way that we could discover and (for whatever reason) they were not able to be properly interrogated for media info when first ingested, then a scan would not affect them at all.

Posted

so scanning is broken? not firing off refreshing? even when it does find new files.

 

 

A scan searches your entire library for anything that has changed since it was last refreshed and refreshes only those items.
Posted

No, I doubt it is broken.  More than likely, there was just a problem getting that info when those were first ingested and nothing about them has changed since.

 

If we re-proved for that on every scan, they would all take forever.

Posted

 just a problem getting that info when those were first ingested

 

so not a problem?

 

even given;

 

just had to 'refresh' a file i added yesterday! that was happily in the libarary but without all the meta-data again.

 

if there's no chance of this being viewed as a bug, what ever i say, then lets forget it, i've already spent a long and frustrating time here.

Posted

Any number of things could be going on to cause that.

 

What we'd need to see is the log from when that item was first ingested and know what the item is.  Thx.

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...