PDA

View Full Version : 7.2.1 Responsiveness



pablolie
2008-11-22, 11:35
I am noticing that with 7.2.1 at random intervals the players, especially the Boom from what I see, have horrible response tims to the remote. This is on a high performance Windows Vista 64 station and plenty of everything - not a resource or bandwidth issue. When I get to the computer to see what is going on, the Squeezecenter window lags for a while until it opens.

Am I the only one observing random, but serious, performance issues on 7.2.1?

CatBus
2008-11-22, 17:26
Am I the only one observing random, but serious, performance issues on 7.2.1?

I'm certainly not seeing any of this. Except for the SqueezeCenter web interface, this all sounds like normal wireless network flakiness. Do any/all of the problems go away when you connect wired?

bpa
2008-11-22, 17:31
Enable "Network & Server Health" monitoring to get definitive measurements - it may also help to indicate the cause of the problem.

pablolie
2008-11-22, 21:34
I'm certainly not seeing any of this. Except for the SqueezeCenter web interface, this all sounds like normal wireless network flakiness. Do any/all of the problems go away when you connect wired?

My wireless network isn't flaky. It is rock solid and support video transfers with utter reliability. The Sboxes all have signal strengths of 75% plus, and never have problems while playing. They all support 4mbps when doing network test - all 4 players at once. That is one solid network.

This is Squeezecenter related 100%, I have no doubt about it. I may go uninstall and reinstall it to see if it makes a difference, but that is exactly the kind of stuff one should not have to do...

Oh, network and server health is enabled, and reports nothing unusual.

Ben Sandee
2008-11-22, 22:08
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 12:35 PM, pablolie
<pablolie.3jai8n1227379201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> When I get to
> the computer to see what is going on, the Squeezecenter window lags for
> a while until it opens.

What does this mean? There is no "SqueezeCenter window" as far as I
know. I don't use Vista though so maybe there is some visible server
component. If it's actually a web browser window lagging then that
might be a clue that something else is going on with the system.
Maybe it's related to SC, maybe not. It may be that SC is most
affected by some paging going on, which Windows will do even when
there is plenty of memory.

Ben

pablolie
2008-11-22, 22:21
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 12:35 PM, pablolie
<pablolie.3jai8n1227379201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> ... It may be that SC is most
affected by some paging going on, which Windows will do even when
there is plenty of memory.

Ben

No other programm does that, this computer has 8GB of memory and a very fast processor. Resources are not an issue. I have no doubt it is SC related. Something hangs for some reason on some occasions. I open the SC window, and when it finally opens up the reponsiveness comes back. I will wait with the reinstall until 7.3 comes out if I can tolerate the current behavior.

bpa
2008-11-23, 01:23
"network & Searver Health" monitoring can help identify which component within SC is causing/incurring delays.

pablolie
2008-11-23, 10:19
"network & Searver Health" monitoring can help identify which component within SC is causing/incurring delays.

I have re-installed SC 7.2 from scratch and things seem to be working now as expected (knock on wood). One weird aspect is that SC reports the following in the log every 20 mins or so

Slim::Networking::SqueezeNetwork::PrefSync::_syncD own_error (359) Sync Down failed: No such player: 00:04:20:07:80:98, will retry in 1590

That is the MAC of the SB3 in my main audio system, which seems to be working just fine and has a signal strength of over 75%. It is also there as part of the listed players, so it seems very odd that SC claims "no such player" every 20 mins...? I will go reburn the FW and see if this goes away... I should mention that what finally made me go and bite the reinstall bullet was the fact that finally SC started to get confused as to what player to send music to. I would select the bedroom Duet to play some music via the SC browser interface, and the music would stream to the living room SB3. These two had been previously synched, but the synch relationship had been turned off, and yet I could not get the Duet to play music via the browser interface - it would go to a different player. Obviosuly some pointers in SC were very confused, so it's no wonder there were major lags.

Ben Sandee
2008-11-23, 11:15
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:21 PM, pablolie
<pablolie.3jbc3n1227417901 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> No other programm does that, this computer has 8GB of memory and a very
> fast processor. Resources are not an issue. I have no doubt it is SC
> related. Something hangs for some reason on some occasions. I open the
> SC window, and when it finally opens up the reponsiveness comes back. I
> will wait with the reinstall until 7.3 comes out if I can tolerate the
> current behavior.

I realize that you have no doubt and it's clear that you've made up
your mind. This is a very helpful attitude when someone is trying to
help you. It's good that you've closed off all possible paths except
the one that you know is true.

I'm still wondering what you mean by the "SC Window", because for most
users this is a web browser (IE or Firefox).

Ben

pablolie
2008-11-23, 11:56
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:21 PM, pablolie
<pablolie.3jbc3n1227417901 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:[color=blue]

I realize that you have no doubt and it's clear that you've made up
your mind. This is a very helpful attitude when someone is trying to
help you. It's good that you've closed off all possible paths except
the one that you know is true.

I'm still wondering what you mean by the "SC Window", because for most
users this is a web browser (IE or Firefox).

Ben

It's called a browser window. Could be chrome or Safari as well.

If I had made up my mind about what it is causing the issue I would not be asking. But there are elements that can be easily eliminated as part of the equation. When 4 Squeeze devices can run network test at 4-5Mbit/s at the same time, it is clear the wireless network is not an issue. My wireless network has always been rock solid, and it is easy to test for that with other tools. As to windows itself, there are also performance and system tests one can run. When every other application and system test and performance test runs flawlessly and crisply, the issues can be narowed to another area - and everything indicated Squeezecenter.

The fact that I have not seen the performance issues since re-installing SC 7.2 from scratch (something I was trying to avoid for the usual reasons of inconvenience, as it wipes out several preferences) seems to indicate my suspicion was right. However, now we shall never know what exactly caused it within SC.

I mentioned in my last entry that I observe a re-ocurring synch error in the log file with the one SB3 in my current setup. I wonder whether an accumulation of those over time (a week or two) starts to affect system performance. I have opened a bug with all the information I have been able to gather.

MeSue
2008-11-23, 12:09
I have re-installed SC 7.2 from scratch and things seem to be working now as expected (knock on wood). One weird aspect is that SC reports the following in the log every 20 mins or so

Slim::Networking::SqueezeNetwork::PrefSync::_syncD own_error (359) Sync Down failed: No such player: 00:04:20:07:80:98, will retry in 1590

That is the MAC of the SB3 in my main audio system, which seems to be working just fine and has a signal strength of over 75%. It is also there as part of the listed players, so it seems very odd that SC claims "no such player" every 20 mins...? I will go reburn the FW and see if this goes away... I should mention that what finally made me go and bite the reinstall bullet was the fact that finally SC started to get confused as to what player to send music to. I would select the bedroom Duet to play some music via the SC browser interface, and the music would stream to the living room SB3. These two had been previously synched, but the synch relationship had been turned off, and yet I could not get the Duet to play music via the browser interface - it would go to a different player. Obviosuly some pointers in SC where very confused, so it's no wonder there were major lags.

It looks like it's SqueezeNetwork (not SC) that is reporting 'no such player.' Maybe you just need to connect that player to SqueezeNetwork once?

pablolie
2008-11-23, 12:10
... This is a very helpful attitude when someone is trying to
help you. It's good that you've closed off all possible paths except
the one that you know is true.


I would also like to make one thing clear: my request was not for help in solving the issue. It was a simple yes/no question as to whether someone else was observing the behavior. I have had my SBs since early 2006 and am pretty versed in troubleshooting, and in assessing when it is a system issue and when not. In both Ubuntu and Windows.

It is part of the culture in these forums to initially hold on to the notion that SC can never be to blame. That is must be a system issue. And that as a rule is not very helpful when it is indeed a SC issue. Which on occasion exist.

In any case, I filed a bug report for the aspects of this that I could document. Issue closed.

dcote
2008-11-24, 01:47
i remember reading that other people were seeing un-reliable (confused?) SC behavior, especially when multiple SB's are used. often, it turned out to be IP/MAC related. such as: IP addresses being assigned fixed and DHCP at the same time, resulting in the same address being used in the network - but only sometimes. and/or "soft" MAC addessing, which somehow got misconfigured. logic dictates that if it used to work and then broke, something changed - maybe without you even knowing it.

and *yes* i am/was seeing this sometimes too. on windows *and* linux/NAS. reasons i could determine in my network:
1. resource starved servers (both windows and NAS)
2. disks going to sleep and needing time to wake up (delays responses by ~30 sec.)
3. web interface is/was -as far as i am concerned- so slow to be quite useless. so i don't use it. ;-)