Server/Client Based Software Solutions

[johngalt]

Trolling and searching hasn't really offered much to satisfy my curiosity on this topic, so I wanted to start a discussion. Most of you appear to be Blue Iris fans, but here are my thoughts.

Blue Iris needs a beast of a machine to run because everything is done in Blue Iris. Everyone is building these i7 machines to run it and leave them on 24/7. The thing I've been digging about HikVision iVMS-4200 is the server/client setup. The cameras do the heavy lifting and the server just stores the data. I've been monitoring the CPU and RAM usage and it's next to nothing when only the server is running. When you open up the client, it becomes a CPU hog. My thoughts, let the cameras do their work all the time on a cheap, power efficient headless machine. Those few times you actually check on your footage, you can use your beast (in my case an i7 laptop) to run the client. Why have an expensive, power hungry machine dedicated to the task? A TS140 Lenovo would work great with the server/client software.

I'm wanting to build a dedicated low power machine soon to run iVMS-4200 or anything out their similar. I would love something a little less cryptic than iVMS-4200 though. Sometimes it's not clear what's going on with triggers and recordings. I feel like playback could be a little more friendly. It seems like non of the search parameters work properly based on triggers. The client also seems to set off a bunch of triggers when it's up, no matter what I disable.

What are the other low cost softwares that operate like this? Efficient server and a client that can run on another machine when needed to playback.

(Side note: I get Windows Server free because I'm a STEM student. I also want to build a machine to experiment with that if anyone has any input for hardware/software/general usefullness)

Thanks.

 

[DaveP]

Almost everything is a power / CPU hog.

But... if you purchase a Hikvision NVR then over a period of time the power savings could almost pay for it

 

[fenderman]

Nothing that is cheap... Expect to pay 100 per camera licence for exacq or milestone.. They have cheaper licenses but they limit some functions...
How many cameras do you intend to run and at what resolution?

 

[bp2008]

It is easier and probably more efficient to just buy an intel NUC if you are looking for low power consumption. They've just started selling broadwell-based NUCs though I don't know if you can get them with a 2.5 inch HDD slot yet -- they might be limited to just mSata for now.

 

[Razer]

I use Exacq, and for a basic "Start" system you pay $50 per camera and then $10 per camera per year for updates if you want them. (some sellers sell licenses for less than this but that is retail) It is the lowest resource user of any system I've ever tried. I'll attach a screen shot or two below to illustrate. The software is more, but then I save a ton of money on the system that it runs on so it is not bad. I run sites on NUCs, Laptops, and very old Pentium machines with no issues at all. If you want to try it out as an experiment you can get a one camera version of the software for free and use it as long as you want.

Check out this screen shot - This system is running a 7 year old processor, and it is a CELERON. It is running 8 cameras, five 1mp ACTi cameras, one 3mp Hik camera running at 3mp and two ACTi 4mp hemispheric cameras. Overall this is the processor usage:

I opened the system properties page so you can see the processor and ram too. I can put this on any old system and it will run fine, the processor moves up to about 65-70% with the client open and me watching all the cameras at once on screen. Not bad, and this machine never has the client open other than to maybe assist in aiming a camera as it is a remote facility with no one there. I view the cameras and recordings remotely, using the client on my laptop, thus there is never any strain on the processor on the location at all. I love this solution.

This software worked out best for me, but I also have unusual requirements of my software but regardless I can recommend it to anyone who want the lightest software possible as I've seen nothing use less than this as of yet anyway. This may not work for you at all, but it does prove you point that efficiency is quite possible in a client/server setup of surveillance. I mean really now, that's a 7 year old celeron lol! I did not realize myself it was that old and low powered until I took this screen shot just now for this post lol. I may replace it just due to age...

 

[johngalt]

Great info Razer. May definitely be worth the cost. I don't see what the point is of having a client running all the time on a 400watt, $1000 build. I want something that's not going to jack up my electric bill $30 a month and can build for $200-300.

Overall, do you like the software? I used to sell it for a distributor years ago, but they would never give us the tools to demo it - just a flyer. It was a hard sell that way. Wonder how efficiency is on an Intel vs AMD. You can buy a Sempron for like $9 at Microcenter! Does the license belong to the camera or the machine?

 

[fenderman]

Exacq is nice and as razer points out is very efficient, but the 50 dollar start license has some significant limitations like no nas recording, no two way audio, no event notifications (not sure if that extends to the mobile app, but its listed under live view)..the 16 camera limit should not be an issues for most folks though..and if you dont need recording to nas or two way audio its a viable option...
https://exacq.com/products/start/

 

[Razer]

Great info Razer. May definitely be worth the cost. I don't see what the point is of having a client running all the time on a 400watt, $1000 build. I want something that's not going to jack up my electric bill $30 a month and can build for $200-300.

Overall, do you like the software? I used to sell it for a distributor years ago, but they would never give us the tools to demo it - just a flyer. It was a hard sell that way. Wonder how efficiency is on an Intel vs AMD. You can buy a Sempron for like $9 at Microcenter! Does the license belong to the camera or the machine?

I like the software personally a lot, I am using it on over 80 servers and those have a total of over 1,000 cameras. I'm running video walls, using the web client and using a variety of hardware in computers and cameras and it works well. I use it at home. I have no major issues with it other than finding bugs and such in new versions from time to time but the way I'm using it it is to be expected and they fix what I find at least.

The software is licensed to a network card so what I am doing now is licensing the software to a USB network card. Then I can move that USB dongle to a new computer and the license travels easily. Works with NUCs and laptops too. I do not even use the USB NIC, I use the cards on board the computer, The USB NIC is just there plugged into the computer with no actual network cable attached so it can be seen for licensing purposes. I figure if it is never used at all it ought to last a long, long time!

The features of start are less as @fenderman mentioned but I could use start here for several locations even with out business use. The only thing that is missing that keeps us from using it is that you can only have one start system active in a client at a time. Not an issue at all for home users, but for me with 80+ servers that does not works so well. You can select which system you want active at any given time and have more than one in there, but not simultaneously. I need them all at once so I have to step up one level in licensing.

 

[bp2008]

Great info Razer. May definitely be worth the cost. I don't see what the point is of having a client running all the time on a 400watt, $1000 build. I want something that's not going to jack up my electric bill $30 a month and can build for $200-300.

Overall, do you like the software? I used to sell it for a distributor years ago, but they would never give us the tools to demo it - just a flyer. It was a hard sell that way. Wonder how efficiency is on an Intel vs AMD. You can buy a Sempron for like $9 at Microcenter! Does the license belong to the camera or the machine?

Your high end numbers are a bit over the top. 50-100 watts and $600 is more likely for a high end Blue Iris server (plus extra if lots of storage is required)

Intel has been way ahead of AMD for years in both speed and power efficiency.

It looks like a cheap little celeron NUC would be great for Exacq software. About 10 or less watts of power consumption there. You'd probably have to use USB hard drives though.

 

[fenderman]

Your high end numbers are a bit over the top. 50-100 watts and $600 is more likely for a high end Blue Iris server (plus extra if lots of storage is required)

Intel has been way ahead of AMD for years in both speed and power efficiency.

It looks like a cheap little celeron NUC would be great for Exacq software. About 10 or less watts of power consumption there. You'd probably have to use USB hard drives though.

+1, i routinely buy i7-4770/90 haswell systems for 500-600 dollars..the consumption is about 50-80w depending on load...(no discrete graphics should be used)...

 

[Razer]

I just yesterday built a couple Intel 4790k machines for AutoCAD, which are i7 @ 4ghz with 16gb of DDR3 2400mhz ram, Samsung 850 SSD and high end power supplies and good Nvidia graphics cards for $1100. I guess you could cut out the k on the processor and the graphics cards are replace them with a pair of 3tb storage drives and get the same price and you'd still be overkill for a home DVR running BI. You should be able to spend less to get by.

In my case I in some places now have 30 or more 2-3mp cameras so then I'm not sure what I'd need for BI but I bet even that machine would have issues. For home use though you should be able to come in less than 1k easily enough.

I did not want to ever even worry about specs with my DVRs so I prefer Exacq because if I ever have any performance issue then one thing I never even have to think about is the actual PC hardware now. Makes it simpler which I greatly prefer after getting this deep, simpler is much better in my case! :laugh:

 

[johngalt]

What kind of business do you work for? Sounds like an interesting job.

If I built an i7-4790k, I wouldn't want it just sitting around recording video. I'd want to use it for everything else. That's why I like this HikVision Server set-up. I plan to build a cheap NAS type system here soon. $200-300 and dual purpose with network storage drives. When I get around to building a machine like the ones you did, it would be for doing work and games. I could run the client on it when I wanted to check out my recordings.

 

[Razer]

What kind of business do you work for? Sounds like an interesting job.

If I built an i7-4790k, I wouldn't want it just sitting around recording video. I'd want to use it for everything else. That's why I like this HikVision Server set-up. I plan to build a cheap NAS type system here soon. $200-300 and dual purpose with network storage drives. When I get around to building a machine like the ones you did, it would be for doing work and games. I could run the client on it when I wanted to check out my recordings.

Exactly, that is why I like the client server setup myself. Those machines I built above were not for video either, they were for AutoCAD and general day to day work computers. I just brought those up as they were right round the $1,000 mark you mentioned and I was saying those were massive overkill and I have that much in them so you should be able to go much less.

My systems I build are normally a basic i5 with 4gb of ram and 3-6tb of storage for about $580-$700 depending on 3tb or 6tb. Not bad at all.

I have both i7 machines on the bench in my work area, going to test triple monitors here in a bit and to do so I assume I have to play a game or two to fully test it right? I have a 27" in the center and 2 23" on each side. Time to fully test out the system.....

 

[ahspao]

Just saw this thread and wanted to ask...why a server/client solution rather than buying a Hikvision NVR for $250 ?

I went down this same path and tried to find a server/client type solution and ended up finding that using the NVR was easier for clients.
I have since installed 15 of them and they seem to do well.

 

[Razer]

Just saw this thread and wanted to ask...why a server/client solution rather than buying a Hikvision NVR for $250 ?

I went down this same path and tried to find a server/client type solution and ended up finding that using the NVR was easier for clients.
I have since installed 15 of them and they seem to do well.

In my case I need a much more professional solution, all of my systems are remote and I pull all footage remotely. That is not easy with a basic NVR. I also want to be able to use a wide variety of cameras and use them all fully as far as features which requires better than an NVR. I need 400tb of storage space. I need working video walls. I pull footage daily and remotely pulling footage and then converting it to a useable format and getting it sent to police is a million times easier in a PC based system. My cases are not normal uses I realise lol, but an NVR would not work even close for my needs.


Now, for a client in a small home system sure it is viable. For basic needs a basic device will work perfectly fine. If I were putting in another system in my home, or family's home or whatever I'd still use a client/server solution though. In Exacq were I to use that the software uses almost no resources, it could be installed and running in the background of a basic desktop and you'd never even notice it. That means no hardware needed besides a switch and possibly a hard drive for storage depending on the computer. One POE switch and the existing desktop and I'm good to go hardware wise. As needed the client can be pulled up to review but otherwise no one has anything to mess with. Changing settings, updating camera firmware, reviewing footage, remote access, working web views are all much easier. Troubleshooting any issues is cake on a PC system vs an NVR in most cases.

Exported footage from exacq goes into basic movie files, or my favorite is the standalone .exe file. I can export 16 cameras at once to a single .exe file that has it's own built in viewer, I can watch all 16 cameras, or double click on one and watch it full screen. I can digitally zoom in and out, I can export snapshots with the time and date stamp, slow motion, frame by frame viewing, etc. and all this is done from a single .exe file that I can pop into a dropbox folder and then forward a link to the cops. Man that is easy.

Overall after trying various systems out over the years the client/server solution is vastly better for my needs as I really use the systems daily. If a home user just wants basic surveillance and does not need all the features then a cheap NVR will work fine as the use of exporting video and converting and such would be a very rare need. I see tons of video on TV and youtube where they are videotaping the video of an event with a phone, taping the screen doing playback. They could not get the video off easily, so they just tape a screen on a phone as it is easiest. That will not work for me lol.

 

[johngalt]

That means no hardware needed besides a switch and possibly a hard drive for storage depending on the computer. One POE switch and the existing desktop and I'm good to go hardware wise. As needed the client can be pulled up to review but otherwise no one has anything to mess with. Changing settings, updating camera firmware, reviewing footage, remote access, working web views are all much easier. Troubleshooting any issues is cake on a PC system vs an NVR in most cases.

^^^^^^^^this