OK, so here’s a feature request of mine. I’d like the ability to have a computer other than the one hosting my Plex Media Server to do the transcoding for Plex Sync. My rationale is that a lot of users use Plex with an HTPC, which generally only needs to be able to stream media and connect to storage, and not much else (see: XBMC on Rasperry Pi). These HTPCs are often underpowered and not very ideal for video conversion.
I’d like the HTPC running Plex Media Server to use another computer on the local network for encoding purposes. For me personally, this would shift the load of encoding, which my 2010 Mac Mini sucks pretty hard at, to my 2011 iMac with a 3.4GHz i7.
Comments? Suggestions? Racial Slurs?
I had thought about this but for different purposes. Basically i was thinking it would be cool to have "transcoding farms". This would allow for multiple servers on the same network to cooperate and increase performance on demand, by basically allowing you to have multiple computers encode the same job. This would be very nice if you already run more than one server and serve multiple clients.
Oh, and as far as the racial slurs go, you didn't specify your ethnicity. So i'll just call you a water filled meat bag. I hope that's enough.
1 Like
I dont get it, why not have a separate server to handle all media and stream to all your clients?
Mac mini (powerful) running PMS, and several raspberry pi/mac mini/ipads/whatever running the client
I dont get it, why not have a separate server to handle all media and stream to all your clients?
Mac mini (powerful) running PMS, and several raspberry pi/mac mini/ipads/whatever running the client
Exactly my setup.
For me the main requirement for a HTPC is to be quiet (I don't want fans and drives making noise while I am watching media) which also usually means not high powered, so I have my PMS hosted on a powerfull server in another room and the HTPC is purely for viewing media.
I dont get it, why not have a separate server to handle all media and stream to all your clients?
Mac mini (powerful) running PMS, and several raspberry pi/mac mini/ipads/whatever running the client
I frequently boot into windows or put the iMac to sleep, since it sucks a lot of power. Either way, the server gets shut down.
I have a mac mini 2011 as media server, so far I have yet to find something that is not able to stream. It consumes around 50W on load, makes no noise and sleeps whenever is not in use, so maybe its just finding the right server?
I have a mac mini 2011 as media server, so far I have yet to find something that is not able to stream. It consumes around 50W on load, makes no noise and sleeps whenever is not in use, so maybe its just finding the right server?
On-the-fly encoding for streaming isn't the issue; I'm talking about syncing. If I want to sync a full season, it takes a long time to encode it prior to transfer. I want to shift the encoding resources to a more powerful CPU on the network to make the syncing faster. Also, the more powerful CPU in question is in another room, so it would be nice for the Mini's fans not to spin up to full blast if I'm watching TV while the syncing is going on.
Having a seperate server to transcode form the actual Plex server would cause a lot of network load as the origonal large file would need to be streaming to the tanscoding server at the same time it was sending back the transcoded version unless clients could also direct connect to the transcoding server, in which case the same traffic is generated but at least the transcoded stream would be more direct.
This could be a lot more than a typical (mix of 10/100 and WiFi) home network could handle... not accounting for techies that have Gigabit wired everywhere.
Having a seperate server to transcode form the actual Plex server would cause a lot of network load as the origonal large file would need to be streaming to the tanscoding server at the same time it was sending back the transcoded version unless clients could also direct connect to the transcoding server, in which case the same traffic is generated but at least the transcoded stream would be more direct.
This could be a lot more than a typical (mix of 10/100 and WiFi) home network could handle... not accounting for techies that have Gigabit wired everywhere.
I expect this feature would probably be used only by techies anyway... me and my gigabit network would be happy for it.
On-the-fly encoding for streaming isn't the issue; I'm talking about syncing. If I want to sync a full season, it takes a long time to encode it prior to transfer. I want to shift the encoding resources to a more powerful CPU on the network to make the syncing faster. Also, the more powerful CPU in question is in another room, so it would be nice for the Mini's fans not to spin up to full blast if I'm watching TV while the syncing is going on.
Is there a reason you don't want PMS installed on that more powerful CPU ?
I expect this feature would probably be used only by techies anyway... me and my gigabit network would be happy for it.
Yup I completely agree. Especially if it were to send WOL to the other servers. I have three fairly powerful Core i7 PCs that are generally in a hybrid sleep state and then my server is an HTPC with an AMD A6 which does surprisingly well however for PlexSync and when I have multiple users requiring transcoding it would be much better to offload some of the stress.
While I imagine the transcoder is limited to whatever ffmpeg supports, I would like to see this go even further - where PMS can use both CPUs and GPUs to transcode, and have "balancing" over multiple servers based either on live/sync or on resource allocation.
I dont get it, why not have a separate server to handle all media and stream to all your clients?
Mac mini (powerful) running PMS, and several raspberry pi/mac mini/ipads/whatever running the client
simple, I have my NAS running plex server indexing and streaming to most of my devices.
sometimes I want to stream to devices that requires transcoding (either fro slow wifi or limited hw), and the nas can't do efficient transcoding. this happens a couple of times a week. PlexSync to the ipad would also take a lot less time.
That would be solved by powering up a pc to do transcoding only when required.
I don't want to invest in a mac mini (or any other pc) just to do occasional transcoding, nor I want to duplicate my library.
I agree with this Feature Request, Personally I run my PMS on a dedicated i7 2700k 16GB ram SSD HD computer. This set up streams and transcodes beautifully, however when transcoding 1080p content CPU load is upwards of 80% I would like to have a 2nd or third computer running along side to share the workload should 2 or more clients require transcoding at the same time.
I agree with this Feature Request, Personally I run my PMS on a dedicated i7 2700k 16GB ram SSD HD computer. This set up streams and transcodes beautifully, however when transcoding 1080p content CPU load is upwards of 80% I would like to have a 2nd or third computer running along side to share the workload should 2 or more clients require transcoding at the same time.
that CPU should have no issue with multiple 1080p transcodes. 80% CPU is not bad, the transcoder will run at 100% when active and then drop to 0 when it is far enough ahead... then back to 100% etc etc.
simple, I have my NAS running plex server indexing and streaming to most of my devices.
sometimes I want to stream to devices that requires transcoding (either fro slow wifi or limited hw), and the nas can't do efficient transcoding. this happens a couple of times a week. PlexSync to the ipad would also take a lot less time.
That would be solved by powering up a pc to do transcoding only when required.
I don't want to invest in a mac mini (or any other pc) just to do occasional transcoding, nor I want to duplicate my library.
I really support this one. Not everyone are lucky to have a dedicated PMS. So this feature can help a lot of Plexusers with an older setup.
I agree with this Feature Request, Personally I run my PMS on a dedicated i7 2700k 16GB ram SSD HD computer. This set up streams and transcodes beautifully, however when transcoding 1080p content CPU load is upwards of 80% I would like to have a 2nd or third computer running along side to share the workload should 2 or more clients require transcoding at the same time.
Mooore than enough!
I got AMD quad-core 3ghz running VMware (signature) and other stuff and i can transcodes to 4x clients at the same time without any issues. My server is always ~90% load when transcoding- even if i only use one client :)
If this was coupled with a wake-on-lan feature, the streaming server could wake up the encoding computer to offload the high CPU workload. This would solve apierleoni's issue.
Is there a reason you don't want PMS installed on that more powerful CPU ?
Electrical draw. Running that more powerful CPU all the time is likely using more electricity (and costing more money) than a low-powered device.
So instead of a simple dedicated media server we want a complex on demand computing cluster?
I would rather they work on aspect ratio fixes for the web and android client.
I think multi-user profiles/access would be a requirement before multi-node clustering. Once multi-user is implemented, more people will begin to share their server access with others and server load could get high enough on high-end hardware requiring one to scale out, but until then we can always scale up.
I would love this feature as well, run up to holiday is a pain trying to get everything transcoded. Sitting on a beach for 2 weeks might make up for it ;-)
