On 2/19/20 7:05 PM, James Almer wrote:
> On 2/19/2020 8:50 AM, Jeyapal, Karthick wrote:
>>
>> On 2/19/20 4:21 PM, Thilo Borgmann wrote:
>>> Am 19.02.20 um 06:18 schrieb Jeyapal, Karthick:
>>>>
>>>> On 2/18/20 9:43 PM, James Almer wrote:
>>>>> Signed-off-by: James Almer <jamr...@gmail.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> libavformat/dashenc.c | 5 +++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/libavformat/dashenc.c b/libavformat/dashenc.c
>>>>> index b910cc22d0..045d2f4df6 100644
>>>>> --- a/libavformat/dashenc.c
>>>>> +++ b/libavformat/dashenc.c
>>>>> @@ -1395,6 +1395,11 @@ static int dash_init(AVFormatContext *s)
>>>>> c->frag_type = FRAG_TYPE_EVERY_FRAME;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> + if (c->ldash && !c->write_prft) {
>>>>> + av_log(s, AV_LOG_INFO, "Enabling Producer Reference Time element
>>>>> for Low Latency mode\n");
>>>>> + c->write_prft = 1;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>> PRFT elements has a significant bitrate overhead, especially in streaming
>>>> mode when each frame is a moof fragment.
>>>> In terms of percentage of stream's bitrate this overhead will be a
>>>> significant % for lower bitrate streams(such as audio streams).
>>>> For any application which does not need PRFT this is an unnecessary
>>>> wastage of bits.
>>>> Hence, I would advise against enabling PRFT without user control.
>>>
>>> Latest to-become spec for low latency mode declares it mandatory [1].
>> I see. Now I understand the motive behind this change.
>>>
>>> I see your point, though. What significance would this actually have, can
>>> you provide some numbers / examples?
>> Sorry. I worked on this bitrate overhead optimizations around a year back.
>> Hence, I don’t have the numbers with and without PRFT handy.
>> But I do have the final overhead numbers (without PRFT) for an audio stream.
>> CMAF Muxer overhead (for an AAC-LC codec) by Sampling frequency
>> 16000 Hz - 14 Kbps
>> 24000 Hz - 20 Kbps
>> 32000 Hz - 28 Kbps
>> 48000 Hz - 40 Kbps
>>
>> At 48KHz, the overhead due to CMAF was 40 Kbps which was significant by
>> itself.
>> My random guess is that PRFT would add another 10Kbps - 20Kbps. But I could
>> be wrong here, as I don’t remember exactly.
>
> prft is a 32 byte box per dash segment, and segment duration can be
> configured. A 1 second long segment for a 96kbps 44kHz audio stream with
> a single moof/mdat pair inside is about 12kb. 32 bytes aren't going to
> affect it.
Thanks for your clarification. If the prft is created only once per segment,
then it is not a big overhead.
I had encountered a case where pfrt was getting created once per fragment, and
hence was worried.
>
> The real overhead is in the CMAF fragmentation/segmentation. Each moof
> box can be in the hundreds of bytes depending on frame count. The more
> moof/mdat pairs (AKA CMAF Chunks) are used, the bigger the overhead.
> Before my recent changes the dash muxer would always make one per frame
> in streaming mode, which was excessive, especially for audio. But now
> you can customize it in various ways.
>
>>
>>> If that turns out to be actually significant, I don't know if we would
>>> prefer an override option to disable it and produce non-conformant
>>> manifests or live with the overhead.
>> Yes. Having an option to control this behavior would be useful.
>>>
>>> -Thilo
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://dashif.org/docs/DASH-IF-IOP-CR-Low-Latency-Live-Community-Review-Dec-2019.pdf
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
>>> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
>>> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
>>> ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
>> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
>> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>>
>> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
>> ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
