[icecast] Icecast or Apache streaming for static files?

[Jack Moffitt]

> What are the advantages for using Icecast to stream static MP3 files 
> rather than just letting Apache handle the streaming?

There are a few variables.

In general, I always use apache for streaming static content.  There is
hardly a reason not to.

Now, when would I change my mind?

- if the songs are very large and the simultaneous listeners are as
well.  apache sucks more resources than icecast per client (one forked
process for each to icecast's 32 bytes extra or whatever).  this can be
worked around by putting apache on multiple boxes.  myplay used to run
exclusively on apache with thousands and thousands of users.  I'm not
sure what they are doing today.

- if the streaming needs any kind of logic.  When vorbis has bitrate
peeling, apache will no longer be a good fit.

So right now, unless apache is breaking on your setup, use it for static
streaming.  The static streaming feature in icecast was added for
convinience, but it's not really capable of much.  I was planning to add
much more to it at the time (like streaming playlists or streaming 30
second clips from full mp3s, or streaming a random 30 seconds of the
files, etc, but never got around to it.

Of course, this argument will change as soon as there is a decent RTSP
server.  I think one could be implemented within the Apache 2.0 module
API, but I haven't looked into this in depth.

jack.

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.