You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently, when segmenting a file, a large number of moof boxes are created.
For the files I've been looking at, this results in ~1MB overhead per track per minute (more or less depending on frame/samplerate).
That's probably not much of an issue when doing on-the-fly segmentation for playback, but isn't ideal when remuxing files for long term storage.
For the cases I'm thinking of there's a big advantage in being able to fragment/separate tracks on clients before uploading to servers. In particular, it would be useful to create moofs that contain an entire group of pictures.
If I were to create a patch that either:
allows for controlling this in the current segmentation code path
adds a new segmentation code path that creates larger moofs
Would that be likely to be accepted as a merge?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently, when segmenting a file, a large number of moof boxes are created.
For the files I've been looking at, this results in ~1MB overhead per track per minute (more or less depending on frame/samplerate).
That's probably not much of an issue when doing on-the-fly segmentation for playback, but isn't ideal when remuxing files for long term storage.
For the cases I'm thinking of there's a big advantage in being able to fragment/separate tracks on clients before uploading to servers. In particular, it would be useful to create moofs that contain an entire group of pictures.
If I were to create a patch that either:
Would that be likely to be accepted as a merge?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: