[VU+ Duo2] 75s boot time????

[2stein]

i had this perception already for quite a while that my duo2 was very slow in booting up.
today i measured the boot time and arrived at 75s.
so, my perception is right.
boot time used to be at 45s (with openvix apollo or earlier) when duo2 was new.
so, what happened???

 

[romdut]

try the cache flush in the plugins

 

[Andy_Hazza]

No you don't put cache plugin on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Andy_Hazza]

Your setup is wrong somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[2stein]

i did a fresh 4.1.16 flash and just restored settings... no plugins.
nothing special, just 4 tuner unicable setup.

 

[Andy_Hazza]

Latest image is 4.2.005. Can you try that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[2stein]

i will (later)...
measured e2 startup (init 3): 45s.
so, 30s until e2 starts is imho very long.

 

[Huevos]

Of course it will take longer than before. There is more stuff in the core, different kernel, etc.

Solo2 takes 60 seconds and that is a fast box.

Any reason why you are timing this? Or are you just measurebating?

 

[DaMacFunkin]

Lots of things can effect boot up times, network mounts are usually the worst culprit.

 

[Larry-G]

try the cache flush in the plugins

Why does every idiot under the sun automatically say "use the cache flush" plugin every time some one posts a issue with their box ?.

Seriously dude learn what it does before you recomend a plugin and in this case cache flush will have absolutely no benefit in this situation what so ever. The only box you ever need to use cache flush on is the original Duo and only then where it displays issues with the memory leak (or with the absolutely latest images as they are way too bloated for the old duo to handle now adays). Chucking cache flush on for no other reason will not help and certainly not on such a powerful receiver as the duo2.

 

[Larry-G]

Boot times are directly effected by what you put on the receiver and to be honest why are you so hung up on the boot time any way ?. Do you really sit there and watch the TV while the receiver is booting up ?. Barring people who do a shit load of testing you don't really need to power down / reboot your box all that often.

 

[2stein]

Of course it will take longer than before. There is more stuff in the core, different kernel, etc.

Solo2 takes 60 seconds and that is a fast box.

Any reason why you are timing this? Or are you just measurebating?

well, i'm just turning the box on in the evening when we want to watch tv, and i was wondering why the startup felt so slow compared with when the box was "young". that's why i measured the time and was horrified that it took so much longer.
i understand "more stuff in the core, different kernel, etc." but i don't understand what additional value i get for that when i'm just using dvr-functionality.

 

[2stein]

Lots of things can effect boot up times, network mounts are usually the worst culprit.

my box has no network mounts at all...

 

[2stein]

Boot times are directly effected by what you put on the receiver and to be honest why are you so hung up on the boot time any way ?. Do you really sit there and watch the TV while the receiver is booting up ?. Barring people who do a shit load of testing you don't really need to power down / reboot your box all that often.

well, you do need to reboot often because standby doesn't save energy at all ;-)

 

[Larry-G]

well, you do need to reboot often because standby doesn't save energy at all ;-)

Your more likely to end up with a hardware failure if your powering the box off fully every night then booting it back up every day and you won't exactly save a fortune by powering it off any way.

If your that concerned just use deep standby, it's almost a full shutdown power consumption wise, but still allows the box to wake for recordings or at a preset restart time using the power timers function.

 

[2stein]

well, my fault... i meant deep standby when i said power off.
and the 75 seconds are boot up from standby.
it sounds like the boot process takes longer with newer images... 60s for solo2 for example.
but duo2 should not be slower than solo2.
anybody with a duo2 who has faster boot time than 75s?

 

[Larry-G]

it sounds like the boot process takes longer with newer images... 60s for solo2 for example.
but duo2 should not be slower than solo2.

Hardly surprising as every new image contains more than the last hence my argument that the original duo should no longer be supported but that's been falling on deaf ears for two years so I don't bother any more. My solo2 is lightning fast but that's still on the hades series image and working great.

 

[judge]

well, my fault... i meant deep standby when i said power off.
and the 75 seconds are boot up from standby.
it sounds like the boot process takes longer with newer images... 60s for solo2 for example.
but duo2 should not be slower than solo2.
anybody with a duo2 who has faster boot time than 75s?

You're probably using a badly configured plugin on your Duo2.

 

[2stein]

that's what i thought as well....
therefore i did a fresh install without restoring the plugins... just settings.

 

[romdut]

Why does every idiot under the sun automatically say "use the cache flush" plugin every time some one posts a issue with their box ?.

Seriously dude learn what it does before you recomend a plugin and in this case cache flush will have absolutely no benefit in this situation what so ever. The only box you ever need to use cache flush on is the original Duo and only then where it displays issues with the memory leak (or with the absolutely latest images as they are way too bloated for the old duo to handle now adays). Chucking cache flush on for no other reason will not help and certainly not on such a powerful receiver as the duo2.

We only do original boxes on here you stupid idiot