plonevideo team mailing list archive

[Dimitris Moraitis <dimo@xxxxxxxx>]

Στις 27-11-2009, ημέρα Παρ, και ώρα 11:46 +0200, ο/η victor rajewski
έγραψε:
> Dimitris and I were discussing splitting this functionality away from
> collective.flowplayer into a seperate product, which would handle the
> following things:
> * notifying the transcode daemon of a file to transcode
> * accepting the transcode daemon's callback
> * storing the url of the transcoded file as an annotation OR storing
> the transcoded file itself as an annotation
> * Making the video view use the transcoded version
> 
> How does this sound? Are there features missing?

* configuration panel for setting transcode server hostname(s)
* round-robin load balancing when there are more than one transcode
servers defined

> 
> Also, I was thinking in the ideal world we would have three transcoding options:
> 1) small site, occasional video, transcoding is done via plone itself
> by executing a system command and consuming the generated file into
> the ZODB. Python threads be damned
> 2) medium site, transcoding daemon runs on the same server as the
> plone. videos transcoded via the transcode daemon can get consumed
> into the ZODB and served via plone. transcoding daemon and plone would
> have communicate the file paths to each other.
> 3) large site, transcoding daemon runs on seperate server and serves
> the transcoded video files. Transcoding daemon sends a URL to plone,
> which stores only the URL.

4) Very large site with many uploaded videos / minute that needs to
balance the cpu and network load to several physical servers.

> 
> Initially I'll be focussing on option 3, then 2. What are people's thoughts?
> 

I don't see much value on option 1. Besides that, the best strategy IMO
is to make simple things simple and complex things possible to achieve.