Print

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

[ghadlock]

I had a quick question on the application of a "Library Server" config vs. having J River Media Center 12 having it's own copy of the library.

Here's my setup:

- I have two licensed copies of J River MC 12.  One copy is running on a large / fast server that holds all of my music files.  That copy of J River monitors the library in the folders on the local hard drive.
- The second J River instance is running on a "satellite" PC that is connected to my home theater system and used to play music to my receiver / home speakers.  This second J River instance could be configured either to 1)  Map the music collection as a network share (which is the same server that holds the first copy of J River) and auto-import the library itself or 2) I could configure the first copy of J River as a "Library Server" and have this second J River instance pull the library from the J River running on the server as a "Library Server".

What are the pros / cons to each configuration, specifically auto-import from mapped network drives vs. use the Library Server functionality?  Is either configuration recommended over the other or does one configuration offer better performance than the other?  The connectivity is over a 1GB LAN so bandwidth isn't a problem with either config.

[RhinoBanga]

I have just setup a similar scenario:

A big/fast Suse linux fileserver (4GB ram/2.5TB HDD) running MC inside a vmware image running library server
6 satellite PC's running MC connecting to the main library


I am doing it this way as:

1)  I don't want anyone to delete/modify anything on the fileserver without my say-so
2)  I don't want every machine to have to sync anytime something changes


I do expose shares (and map network drives) which allow real-only explorer access to the music/video/photograph collection which really caters for #1, however #2 is the main reason I use library server.

[ghadlock]

Thanks for that feedback.  Do you notice a performance difference (speed/lag, memory utilization on the satellite PC, etc.) in this setup?  I like the idea of a single instance of J River "managing" the collection and limiting access and file syncs, though I'd also like to know your thoughts on the performance of the Library Server config. Thanks!

[RhinoBanga]

All the satellite PC's are fairly new so there is no noticable issues there.   The vmware image has been allocated 1GB and it's CPU utilization hovered around 5% when one of the kids was sync'ing earlier.   Going thru MC's library server bypasses all of the SMB caching Windows implements, so technically there will be an overall performance loss compared to using UNC/mapped drives however (like you) I am running a GB LAN so in context the loss is negligible.

[JONCAT]

IIRC, Library Server won't allow seeking in video or audio; maybe this has changed. Could be an issue if I understood you will use the satellite system as an HTPC.

I do a lot of tagging, and I have to contend with my wife camping out in front of the main system, so having a mapped/shared library (akin to glynor's script system) is essential (especially now that the writer's strike is over  )


DC