Bugzilla – Bug 1126
New default values for scroll rate and scroll pixels
Last modified: 2011-11-06 23:22:17 UTC
Just found the new scroll rate and scroll pixels settings in 'player setting' 'display' in the web interface. I have changed them to 0.04 & 0.04 and 2 & 2. My squeeze box now looks a thousand times better when scrolling and improves the readability when using the 'medium' fond from accross the room. On my server this adds the following load: 10 kb/sec on the wired connection (compared to 3 kb/sec) 5.5% processor useage when scrolling 'nowplaying' but paused (compared to 3%) This is on a wired squeezebox and a quite underpowered server (celeron 633, 512mb, mandrake 10). I would expect a more modern server to not even notice the difference in % cpu useage. The only problems I can see are: 1) ?over a wireless link - is sending loads of small packets healthy for a wireless link? 2) for remote softsqueeze connection 10kb/sec vs 3kb/sec is quite a hit on bandwidth I am moving my server soon so it uses a wireless bridge for conection to the wireless router that my sb is hard wired to - so I shall see what happens to that. Perhaps the default value for wired connections should be increased to similar values as above to show off the display capabilities to the new user who wouldnt usually fiddle with these values? Perhaps the deault could be different for wired and wireless clients? The softsqueeze issue probably doesnt matter any more ?as the scrolling is done on the client side?
Maybe another way of doing this is to suggest other values for the scroll rate and pixels in the server settings. This could be example settings for wired connections, wireless connections, and wireless connections with loads of traffic on it. Whilst it is possible to fiddle without guideance this might put the new user off. Perhaps a guide to 'tuning' slimserver could be included which points this feature out (and other things like disabling bitrate limiting on wireless connections etc.)
Those settings are definately an improvemnt. I think it would be much better if this could be handled in hardware though. There woulod then be no hiccups due to network congestion. I suggest getting people to vote for bug 936!
Unassigned bugs cannot have a priority.