Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[zxsix]

I currently run Media Server.exe as a service under Windows 2000.  I use FireDaemon to handle running it as a service.  This allows me to stream the MC library, even though the machine hosting it is at a login prompt and a desktop is not loaded.
This has been working great.
I don't have to worry about corruption of my library database when someone logs onto the computer and starts MC, because Media Center.exe and Media Server.exe were designed to run simultaneously and Media Server.exe has read only access to the database.


I'm hesitant to run MC as a service under FireDaemon because the library may get corrupted if someone runs it on the desktop while it's running as a service.
With Media Server.exe it was foolproof.

The library server plugin works, but I have to leave the machine logged in to a desktop in order to run MC.  That's not an option for me as we have several people sharing the same machine.

Another benefit of running it as a service.... I travel out of state for work and often stream MC to my laptop in the hotel room.  With Media Server running as a service, it doesn't matter what's going on with the machine at home.

If I were to leave the machine logged in with MC running the Library Server plugin,  it wouldn't be as stable because a user at home could close MC.  The machine may be rebooted and then it would be sitting there at a login prompt with no MC running.  With Media Server running under FireDaemon, it would be running the moment the machine finished rebooting and would require no user intervention to start it.

I hereby petition to keep Media Server.exe around.

 
 

[Matt]

Thanks for the feedback.  We're still working on this area, so hang with us.

As long as each user has their own library (which has always been necessary), it should be safe to use FireDaemon to run MC.  When you do log in, you'll only activate the UI of running core -- not start a new one.

If Media Center has a lightweight "server" mode that handles if a user closes the program, would this do everything you needed?

Thanks again.

[zxsix]

I'd rather not have to manage separate libraries though.
With the current Media Server.exe I can have it reading from library A and also run library A on the desktop with no worries.  That's perfect for me.

Here's an option that I think would work:

I could run Media Center as a service running library B(with library server plugin sharing library A) via FireDaemon and then start up MC on the desktop running library A .
Library B wouldn't need to contain anything since I'd never really use that library.  That would just be used to allow the service to have a different library open than the one I normally use.

Question: is there a way to tell MC which library to open via a command line parameter such as "Media Center.exe /library:default   ?

[John Gateley]

Hi zxsix,

I think FireDaemon does what we need. I tried it and it worked pretty well. The configuration I used was "Show Window: Normal", "Logon Account: \.gateley", "Interact with Desktop" checked, "Upon Program Exit: Restart the Program". (Note: your account must have a password, blank passwords not allowed).

Do this with Media Center NOT running. It brings up Media Center on the desktop, and you can log out, it'll still be there. If you try to run a second copy of Media Center, it just brings up the first. If you exit Media Center, it restarts (though we'll fix this soon).

Give it a try and let us know, we'll make a MC Light flavor for the daemon that doesn't load all the fluff.

j

[zxsix]

Firedaemon works for me running Media Center.exe.
I'm just wondering why you're plan on a Media Center Lite when you already have Media Server.  It does  what I need.

The 1 downside I can think of that won't let running MC as a service work for me.....   If MC is running as a service, with the interact with desktop checked, that works for when I'm home.
What it will prevent me from doing, though, is sometimes I use terminal services (remote desktop protocol) to run a session on the machine at home.  I do sometimes modify tags and even import new songs from this remote session.
The problem occurs when doing this because the remote session runs another instance of media center.exe in memory.  That means I'd have the same library open twice, and would run the risk of corruption.

Running the old Media Server.exe as the service, and then running Media Center.exe at the desktop level (local console or remotely) seems to be the best setup for what I do, since Media Server is accessing it in read only mode.

I installed build 133 today, then copied back in the old Media Server.exe and it still works.  I think I'll continue to run that way for a while and see what other options come along.

[John Gateley]

MC Light would do things differently - not load so much on startup, and not allow exiting in the normal fashion, otherwise it'd be the same.

For the terminal server problem: log in, kill the service, start MC, do your editing, and then restart the service. It's not graceful, but it works.

j

[zxsix]

yeah, I could always start MC via a script instead of the normal shortcut calling media center.exe.

NET STOP MCService
c:\media center\media center.exe
NET START MCService
Exit

[lalittle]

I must have been out of the loop for too long.  Why is Media Server being discontinued and replaced by the Library Server?  Could someone possibly give a quick rundown on the differences between the previous Media Server and the new "Library Server" -- i.e. what does the new one do that the old one didn't, and vice versa?

For example, can the Library Server run without MC running like MS does now?  Also, does the same "set" of information transfer over when using LS -- i.e. not just songs, but custom View Schemes, etc.?  I'm don't have time to switch to 11 yet to try it out.

Thanks,

Larry

[lalittle]

One other thing -- does Library Server solve the problem where songs always have a gap between them?  Media Server always put gaps (longer than usual ones) between songs, even with gapless formats like wave.

Larry

[John Gateley]

yeah, I could always start MC via a script instead of the normal shortcut calling media center.exe.

NET STOP MCService
c:\media center\media center.exe
NET START MCService
Exit

Cool. I don't know how to write windows scripts, but if you can do an "if" statement, it could be:

if logging in on terminal server
  NET STOP MCService
end if
C:...media center.exe
if logging in on terminal server
  NET START MCServer
end if

I bet you can tell between a terminal server login and a console login by the environment variables.

This way, you'd only shut down the server when actually logging in remotely.

j

[KingSparta]

MC Light would do things differently

MC Light, Hummm

[DWAnderson]

I haven't moved past build 128, because the removal of Media Server makes me nervous. Perhaps someone can explain whether this switch is a problem for how I use MC now.

Some background:

I have MC Server running on a server computer. The MC library is on a network share as are all of the files in MC's library (identified in MC's library by UNC paths). Most of the time, other PCs in the house access MC by accessing Media Server.

When I want to make changes to the MC library, e.g. add a view scheme, add media or change tags, I'll run MC on a PC other than the server and just load the MC library directly from the network share.

I've never had a problem operating this way. I understand that there may be some risk operating Media Server on the server while modifying the library using another PC. Nevertheless, the risk is acceptable to me given the convenience. Because Media Server never changed the library, the risk seemed managable.

Question:

Using Library Server, can I accomplish the same thing? With the same level of risk?

I suspect I am not the only one that uses MC this (or a similar) way, so the answer will probably be helpful to more than just me.

Thanks.

[Shadowen]

I haven't moved past build 128, because the removal of Media Server makes me nervous. Perhaps someone can explain whether this switch is a problem for how I use MC now.

Some background:

I have MC Server running on a server computer. The MC library is on a network share as are all of the files in MC's library (identified in MC's library by UNC paths). Most of the time, other PCs in the house access MC by accessing Media Server.

When I want to make changes to the MC library, e.g. add a view scheme, add media or change tags, I'll run MC on a PC other than the server and just load the MC library directly from the network share.

I've never had a problem operating this way. I understand that there may be some risk operating Media Server on the server while modifying the library using another PC. Nevertheless, the risk is acceptable to me given the convenience. Because Media Server never changed the library, the risk seemed managable.

Question:

Using Library Server, can I accomplish the same thing? With the same level of risk?

I suspect I am not the only one that uses MC this (or a similar) way, so the answer will probably be helpful to more than just me.

Thanks.

This is exactly how I use Media Center and Media Server.  I personally do not like the seperate plugins for library server and tivo server.  I would like to see Media Server stay around and furthermore it could be updated to run as an application or a service.

[John Gateley]

Hi DWAnderson,

You'll have to change how you do things a little: Library Server runs in Media Center which can change the database, allowing corruption.

This may be a hassle, but it gives me the tools I need to start working on other problems (like updating play counts, or having the server notify the client that the DB has changed). Instead of editing the library on a third machine, you could just edit the library on the server machine.

j

[DWAnderson]

You'll have to change how you do things a little: Library Server runs in Media Center which can change the database, allowing corruption.

Only problem is that the server is in the root cellar! I'll have to think about some alternative approaches!

[John Gateley]

Now that I think about it, wouldn't it be more efficient to make the machine the networked files are on as the library server? As you are doing it now, playing a file requires two trips across the network, not one. The song has to go from the hosting machine to the serving machine, via Windows Networking, and then from the serving machine to the client machine via Media/Library server. Instead, just make the hosting machine the server, and the number of trips is reduced to one.

j

[DWAnderson]

Now that I think about it, wouldn't it be more efficient to make the machine the networked files are on as the library server? As you are doing it now, playing a file requires two trips across the network, not one. The song has to go from the hosting machine to the serving machine, via Windows Networking, and then from the serving machine to the client machine via Media/Library server. Instead, just make the hosting machine the server, and the number of trips is reduced to one.

I must not have been clear. The machine the files are on is the library server. I reference their names using the UNCs for the network shares they are on. This lets me make changes to the library from other PCs. I do this because it is quite inconvenient to physically use the library server any time I want to make additions or changes to the MC library.

[KingSparta]

i wish i had a root cellar

[lalittle]

I'm still confused about some of the more basic issues.

1) If the Library Server runs "in" Media Center, does this mean that MC has to actually be running on the server for a client to see the library?  I like the fact that I can have the very small Media Server app running in the background without having to have the full MC running on the server.

2) Does this mean that you need to actually log onto the machine and manually start MC in order to share it's library, or can LS be run as a seperate app at startup WITHOUT having the full MC running?

3) I currently don't give write permission to the machines on my network -- for security purposes, I give read access only.  Will LS still work given that it cannot write to the server machine, or will this potentially cause problems?

4) What happens if two people try to modify the library at the same time (i.e. what if someone on the client machine is working with the MC library at the same time someone on the server is working on the same library)?

I don't mind the "potential" of being able to modify the server library from a client, but not at the expense of losing all the other aspects of MS listed above.

Thanks for clarification on this stuff,

Larry

[JimH]

As currently implemented, MC must be running for Library Server to work.  If you minimize MC, it runs in about 1.8MB.

[lalittle]

As currently implemented, MC must be running for Library Server to work.  If you minimize MC, it runs in about 1.8MB.

Is there a way to have MC auto run at startup, similar to the way MS works now?  MC10 can minimize to the systray if you want, but is there a way to have MC11 minimize instead of close when hitting the "X" so I don't accidentally close it completely and cut off the clients?  I could see this being a problem in this house.

Also, does anybody know the answers to my questions 3 and 4 above?

Is there any documentation that outlines the differences between MS and ML (good or bad)?  I want to determine if any changes to my current setup/workflow will be needed in order to continue to use MC as I currently do.

Thanks,

Larry

[John Gateley]

Check out firedaemon to autorun at startup.

The "small size" of Media Server is deceptive. It still loads a full copy of the database, and Media Center is optimized to swap out stuff it isn't using.

You must have write access for a variety of reasons, but I believe Media Server requires write access as well.

Currently Library Server is the same as Media Server - changes made on the client are not applied to the server, so there is no chance of corruption.

j

[lalittle]

Check out firedaemon to autorun at startup.

I don't know what this is -- is this another program that allows you to run programs at startup?  I take it this means that MC does not have an option in itself to run at startup, correct?  Could I just add MC to the startup folder with some parameter in the shortcut to start minimized?  If so, how would this be done?

I'd like MC to "normally" start maximized, but I'd like it to start minimized at startup.

UPDATE:  This was answered in another thread -- ANY shortcut can start minimized as part of the shortcut options.

You must have write access for a variety of reasons, but I believe Media Server requires write access as well.

You don't need write access for MS -- does this imply that you don't need it for LS as well?

Currently Library Server is the same as Media Server - changes made on the client are not applied to the server, so there is no chance of corruption.

Okay -- I thought I just read that LS did allow changes to the database from a client.  Since it does not, why would it need write access?

Thanks,

Larry

[John Gateley]

firedaemon (or daemonfire) is a program to start anything at boot time. Otherwise, you can add MC to the startup folder to start it at login time (different than boot time).

By "Write Access", I meant writing to the disk drive. Media Server does write to the disk drive, so you must have some sort of write access. What sort of write access did you mean?

j

[lalittle]

By "Write Access", I meant writing to the disk drive. Media Server does write to the disk drive, so you must have some sort of write access. What sort of write access did you mean?

I meant that the machine running Media Server does not allow the client to make any changes on the server's drives -- i.e. the client does not have write access on the server's drives.

When you say that MS "does write to the disk drive," are you talking about the server writing to it's own drive, or the client writing to the server's drive?  I've been using MS for a long time with the server only granting read access to the client.  Does LS work the same way?

Larry

[John Gateley]

Comparison of Media Server and Library Server and why we're changing.

Library Server was introduced to handle two key problems with Media Server:

First, Media Server loaded a separate copy of the database for TiVo so there were multiple copies in memory at once. It also required that Media Server's copy be completely read-only (changes made on the client were lost on exit).

Second, Media Server was suffering from bloat. It had control of the Media Center client, the TiVo client, and any other clients that I happened to be working on. The architecture wasn't designed to support this in a convenient way.

Library Server and TiVo Server (and more servers to come) address these issues by using MC's database, and running as a plugin. This has lots of benefits:

You'll only load the servers you need.

Manufacturers of devices and other interested parties will be able to write MC servers.  We will make an SDK and provide reference source.

Most servers will see the current database by default, including changes made on the fly. The only one that won't is Library Server, but it will be easier for us to make a "library changed" notification appear on the client.

It will be easier for us to make small changes to the DB (like playcounts) and large changes are easier as well.

There has sometimes been a misconception that running Media Center as a daemon/startup-style program is inefficient.  This is not true.

In the past, when Media Center and Media Server were running at the same time, there were two copies of the database in memory. This typically used the most of the resources.

In addition, MC11 already has a lot of nice unloading capabilities to reduce system impact (even if it's not running as a daemon), so running it does not cause system bloat.

I hope this may help you understand why we chose the path we did, and addresses concerns raised above.  Please let me know if it doesn't.

j

[shortie]

I don't know if this thread is still alive or not but I've been trying to research this topic and haven'tfound a better description of the reasoningbehind the change.  All of the reasoning makes good sense but one item's been omitted -- I have to have a user logged in, even f running it as a service.  Why does this concern me? -- backups.  Now, I'm not a Windows programmer and maybe the problem with backing up open files has been addressed in Windows XP.  I'm not just concerned about the database but about the registry and any other files that Media Center needs to keep open while it's running.

If this is still a problem then maybe Media Center needs to have two modes of operation, server and local, both of which can't be active at the same time.  If in server mode then the Media Center that we're all used to becomes nothing more than a UI and a means of accessing the new "Media Server", even if it's running on the same machine as the Media Center UI.  Maybe we don't even need a "local" mode?

Am I typing nonsense here?  Are there posts I've missed that I should read up on?

[lalittle]

Did you confirm that certain files can't be backed up while MC is running?

Larry

[shortie]

I'm less concerned about backing up the database than I am about the registry.  Generally, the registry hives of logged-in users don't get backed up.  And, if I'm leaving a user logged in all the time, his registry will never be backed up.  See, that's the whole idea behind service accounts.  It's not used for login nor are programs installed by it so the number of registry entries associated with it are minimal.

Now, again, I'm not a Windows programmer and it's possible that this has changed.

[Branxx]

I think the reasons for the introduction of Library Server will resolve many of the shortcoming we had before. I would even like to see it going one step forward and spliting the functionality of the MC11 into two parts: Library Management & Streaming Service, and Media Player Interface Client.

Even on a sigle user setup, Library Management service should run as Windows NT service task and the local client should simply connect to it. In more complex set-ups, the server should be capable of servicing several clients simultaneously (with each client presented with the stream of its choosing, and possibly with several clients submitting new media to the library for storage and management).

[shortie]

Even on a sigle user setup, Libabry Management service should run as Windows NT service task and the local client should simply connect to it. In more complex set-ups, the server should be capable of servicing several clients simultaneously (with each client presented with the stream of its choosing, and possibly with several clients submitting new media to the library for storage and management).

Precisely my belief! Until the development of a standalone server service, though, we are left with driving this with a logged-in user, which considerably reduces the functionality, as far as I can tell.  And that means I have to login to my server machine, start Media Center, leave the user logged in as long as I want to use the server, and then logout again ... at least if I'm concerned about reliable backups.

[salsbst1]

...and with the new functionality, those of us with headless servers have to terminal-serve into that server in order to safely make changes to our library, if I'm reading correctly.