Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Master/remote setup

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Lebanon, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    3,186
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Master/remote setup

    Thanks for that thought.

    FYI - I don't equate sync with wireless. The wireless is there as a backup. (Thieves have struck several of the displays in the area over the past years. One display lost a ton of wires, forcing them to shut down. Great group of retired guys just making good things for the people of the area. Messed up by a bunch of turds.)

    I'm trying to see where the benefit is in having multiple senders on the same wire. The master is quite capable of sending all the data needed to all the controllers. However, if the switches are doing their job correctly, there would be separation of signals. So, none of the data from remotes will make it out onto the main wire. Interesting...

    I'll do some playing with the system as soon as ALL of it is up and running. Thanks again.
    Live, Laugh, Love.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Newtown CT
    Posts
    5,497
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Master/remote setup

    I worry about network latency. If all of the data for a frame needs to come from a single source then some data is sent significantly later than other data (Ethernet is a serial protocol, one bit after the next). If there are multiple senders on little contained islands then the effective time between first frame bit sent to last frame bit sent is shorter.

    An example using made up numbers (2Mb/frame, 40fps 100Mbps network, 10ns/bit):
    Master sends everything

    • Master send 2,000,000 bits of data. This is effectively a full network
      • Time from first bit of frame sent to last bit of frame sent is ~24.9ms
      • Time between last bit sent and first bit of next frame - Near zero.
      • Each hop between devices adds delay and the link from the master to the switch is the most loaded of all of the links
      • Any issue on the sender link or a retry will cause all following frames to be delayed. To mitigate this you must reduce the data being sent on any given network segment.


    • 1 Master and three slaves each fpp is connected to a cheap network switch and we are using unicast
      • Each FPP sends 500,000 bits (simultaneously). Network load on each island is 25% that of the single FPP model
      • Time from first bit sent to last bit sent is ~10ms
      • No visible artifacts caused by network congestion


    NOTE: None of the above really matters when the network is less than 50% loaded. As you approach 50% or exceed it, you may start to see artifacts in the show. that last arch looked just a little bit late a moment ago but now it seems fine. Hey that star skipped but it looks fine now. etc... FYI: My show used to run with a single player and seemed just fine. The above are just some of the factors that encouraged / troubled me to move to a remote FPP model as my show expanded.

    All of this assumes you are not using multicast. Multicast would still flood your network no matter how many FPPs you used.

    Your plan of setting things up as you know they work for you is a good one. Then you can try setting up one remote in the furthest corner of your display and see how it behaves.


    2021 New Tune-to sign. New 40x27 matrix at the house. Retiring the Strip based matrix. Updating some of the old window frames to the new house. Adding two new songs.
    2020 Full sized show reworked for the new location. Only adding (famous last words) 13 RBLs that I finally got converted to using pixels
    2019 - Just moved into a new home (yet another change of plans). Will be dim but not dark. Too much to do at the new place to leave time for a show. Dim show (3000 pixels) had regular visits most nights.
    https://www.youtube.com/user/MartinMueller2003

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Lebanon, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    3,186
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Master/remote setup

    Our hardwire network is using Gig switches. Any flooding of the network using current controllers, players, etc. seems to be outside the possibilities of the system (right now) because they are all "lower speed".

    Before I went remote across the lake, the Ubiquiti network held its own! (I don't really consider this hardware to fall under the category of "wifi" that we all have come to learn not to use for show data. Much better!!!) I was surprised. After going remote with all of them on the other side, you don't even see the traffic - at least not on my cheap analyzer.

    I'll give it a try. Thanks for the advice and your thoughts.
    Live, Laugh, Love.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •