To jump back briefly to my system configuration with its saturated ethernet port, thank you RevJoe for prompting me to think more carefully about what I have and what I need. So I sketched out my system (including what I want) as you suggested. It's attached. The physical location of things does lend itself to using a third switch - the one wildlife camera I have at the moment is a big Dahua SD-59225-HNI PTZ so definitely needs another PoE+ / 802.3at switch. I hope that transferring three cameras away from the TPE-160 will bring its traffic down to an acceptable level. I'm sure it's the same for many others, systems evolve and grow over time - so you're stuck with much of what you already have.Your confusing me with the offloading. I don't fully understand your hardware configuration maybe draw it out. So I was re-reading your post on the previous page so your using three NICs, built-in nic for internet, and 2 of your additional 4 ports connected to two 16 port poe switches then your cameras? How many cameras are your talking about? Do you need 16 ports?
No. The end to end connection between any one point depends on the links involved. so if you have a 100MB switch between the cams and the the main 1GB switch the link from cam to 1gb switch is 100mb. think of the link speed as your pipe diameter. your speed between points is always at the lowest diameter of the pipe. that being said if your pc goes to the 1gb switch and then that switch links to the 100mb switch, and other items and assuming those other items are spewing network traffic on the 1gb switch meant for our pc then your link to the 1gb switch is going to use that 1 GB pipe and your port usage will vary based on the amount of traffic pointed at your pc. But if you only have traffic coming from the 1 100MB switch then your pc will have a 1GB link to the switch but your monitored traffic usage should be right around 100MB assuming your 100MB switch is saturated. Does that make sense?To jump back briefly to my system configuration with its saturated ethernet port, thank you RevJoe for prompting me to think more carefully about what I have and what I need. So I sketched out my system (including what I want) as you suggested. It's attached. The physical location of things does lend itself to using a third switch - the one wildlife camera I have at the moment is a big Dahua SD-59225-HNI PTZ so definitely needs another PoE+ / 802.3at switch. I hope that transferring three cameras away from the TPE-160 will bring its traffic down to an acceptable level. I'm sure it's the same for many others, systems evolve and grow over time - so you're stuck with much of what you already have.
I have one question - If I were to buy a (I'm guessing managed) switch specified at 1Gbit, do they all gather together data from their ports running at 100Mbit and upscale them into a 1Gbit stream if that upstream port is connected to a 1Gbit device (ie the network card)?
Maybe this will help you figure out your bandwidth issues needsDear RevJoe, thanks again for the explanation, even though I may still be missing a key point. Following on from your suggestion and before sending my previous message I did look at the spec for several managed switches and as you have now clarified, I didn’t find rate conversion (100Mbit to 1Gbit). So, bearing in mind that CCTV IP cameras operate at 100Mbit, I’m afraid I still fail to see the point of buying a switch that is either capable of 1Gbit or is managed.
So, we‘re back to where I started, checking out with you guys that the best solution to solve a saturated NIC port running at 100Mbit is to move some of the cameras to another NIC port via a 100Mbit switch having a sufficient power budget - isn’t it? - as per my sketch.
If true, it makes you realise that a multi port NIC is a fabulous product. Not only can it be configured to shield cameras from the Internet, it can also handle 100Mbit on all ports simultaneously. And is cheap to buy.
Might also be the options for retriggers. I need to fine tune my retrigging settings. I been lazy this last week I need to devote a full night of going through all my alerts to tweak the motion zones, and triggers and the timing of the retriggers I am also behind several version of BI, which might be way my ONVIF stuff is not triggering deepstack. I am also considering trying out deepstack cpu to see what the processing time and cpu usage might be my gt1030 avgs 250ms when processes a image. GPU prices on ebay are crazy.I have an issue I've seen and proved while watching live:
The camera is already triggered from wind, then around 5-10 seconds into the still triggered from motion a car drives by and BI/DS misses it. I assume this is because it analyzed the first 5 secs of images and missed the car at 6 secs in?
Would it fix to change the number of analyzed images to the same as the break time: 10 at 1 sec with break time at 10 sec?
OK thanks RevJoe, I’ll chew some of this over.Maybe this will help you figure out your bandwidth issues needs
CCTV Calculator is a tool designated for camera system basic parameters determination and testing. It enables easy calculation of an appropriate lens focal length, camera viewing angle, IP camera bandwith, storage capacity for records archiving and of other camera system parameters.www.cctvcalculator.net
I get what your doing, your trying to offload some of the workload form the trendnet to the outbuilding. I am assuming your intending to buy a another switch for there. If it was me I would got POE GB switch right there in your house and move the trendnet to the outbuilding and route that input into your GB switch. Ignore that the cameras are only using 100MB ports that's not the issue here. The issue is the pipe between the switches and your PC.
Do you POE Injectors? Maybe some that came with your various cameras your not using? If so then use them in the out building and use a 1GB unmanaged switch then you have some room for the additional cams your planning if I read the diagram right. Your issue is your network bandwidth not your cameras. I get there is a cost but a its a one time cost to future proof if your not done expanding. But if your not adding more cams then your method is the cost effective way.
Have you considered optimizing the frame rates and format being used? I am using H.265, FPS 20, and VBR for my bit rate. I am avg 15MB on my BI ethernet for my 4 cameras. H264 will use more then the H265. Also for reference my switch runs several VLANs. My main data VLAN which includes the internet and a camera only one VLAN for BI.
Also keep in mind your PC only has so much processing abilities and in and out lanes (Known as HSIO and PCI-E Lanes) you can hit a wall, as those items are limited on based on your CPU and motherboard build, when this happens the bottleneck is now the PC not the network.
Anyways its all food for thought.
Very useful feedback IAmATeaf to have 65% as a maximum target level. Many thanks for that.At Dave, even though the cams are only 100mbs the connection back to your BI PC is also only 100mbs which is what is being saturated. Also don’t forget that TCP/IP networks due to the way they work don’t really like or perform that well once they reach level of 65% saturation as you end up with collisions and fallbacks.
This is why I ensured that any uplink connections on my switches are 1gbs back to the BI PC.
Oh dear, sebastiantombs and Edcfish, will I ever get to the bottom of this one? Firstly, please believe me when I say that it’s easy to understand that the data from all the camera ports in a switch must add arithmetically not to lose data in the upstream port. However, RevJoe’s advice to select a 1Gbit switch prompted me to sketch my system and ask the following question in post #426:-Here is another way to look at it.
If you have 10 cameras and each of your cameras are consistently using 20% (20MB) of the 100MB connection from the camera to the switch; with 10 cameras all on and using that 20MB aggregated is now 200MB total bandwidth coming into ( and needing to go out of ) the switch.
The total bandwidth needed from the switch to the PC in order to not lose any data is now double the capacity of the actual 100MB uplink to the PC.
If that uplink to the PC were 1GB (1000MB for ease of math) then you would only be using 20% of the total bandwidth (200MB of 1000MB) between the switch and the PC, leaving plenty of headroom.
And as has already been said, the theoretical maximum is significantly higher than the real world maximum. That 65% is pretty dead on for every decent brand of switch I have used...there were a couple of no name-ish type 5 port switches i used to have that seemed to bog down after a few minutes of any sort of continuous streaming.
I use a switch similar to this one: D-Link PoE+ Switch at Amazon
Depending on exactly what your needs are, there are certainly smaller and cheaper models available such as this one: NETGEAR 5-Port Gigabit Ethernet Unmanaged PoE Switch at Amazon