QA » openQA Project

I like the time lapse effect of the current implementation. If you make the videos play in real-time speed by default I am sure some people would watch the videos in real-time and waste their time :D

And the fact remains that the video is not real time, but really jumpy - turtle speed :)

Mh... haven't tough about Chromium users. In Firefox one can just select the desired playback speed in the right-click context menu but Chromium doesn't offer this (actually one of the reasons I still prefer Firefox). Not sure how people actually watch these videos. I usually use mpv URL because it is really good at seeking and shortcuts are nice (including ] to increase the speed).

And the fact remains that the video is not real time, but really jumpy - turtle speed

That is true. Maybe it would be nice if only the timestamps would be adjusted but not the playback speed. So the player's progress bar would show the real time but still play it by default with 24 FPS. Likely that's not possible.

Is the speed of the video as it is right now increased by a constant factor? If so, I could just tell people (who are asking me about this) to multiply by a certain factor if they want to know the real time.

I disagree to play the video at real time by default. And firefox only allows between 0.5x and 2x speed - and our videos are 12x. Putting that info in the webui could help users I guess

" so people can multiply timestamps or durations to know how long something took for real." if this information is indeed useful, should we perhaps add the adjusted timestamps to logs?

the logs contain real timestamps. this is just about netflix customers

Videos are not written with a constant "real time" frame rate, but based on similarity level. See
https://github.com/os-autoinst/os-autoinst/blob/23d7584b7ff798fe9bd33e9faf5e8ef9cd5900a4/backend/baseclass.pm#L424

One possibility to make the relation between "real time"/wallclock timestamps and video time visible would be to:

1. output the video timestamp in the autoinst.log every time(?) a video frame is written
2. create a subtitle file showing the wallclock time - https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/07/adding-captions-and-subtitles-to-html5-video/

we either write a new frame or a R - so IMO it is constant frame rate

You are almost correct - we try to push frames at a constant rate of 0.5s/frames, but in reality this ends up somewhat slower, sometimes significanly slower in case of stalls.

I have created a prototype for overlaying wall clock timestamps (can be switched of), see https://stefanbruens.github.io/

But does the error really matter? I guess the use case is to report 'it took 2 minutes for X' - and this might have been actually 110 or 130 seconds instead (and the error is most likely not even that big).

Having said that, I do like your prototype

@StefanBruens I never considered the possibility of creating our own web-based media player. But this looks good and it wouldn't be a big effort to include it in openQA.

Reference to outstanding PR: https://github.com/os-autoinst/os-autoinst/pull/1059

@StefanBruens could you share a bit about your prototype from #42050#note-10 ? Can you say where is the code for that?

okurz wrote:

@StefanBruens could you share a bit about your prototype from #42050#note-10 ? Can you say where is the code for that?

The complete code is actually in the link above, https://stefanbruens.github.io/ , or if you prefer a github repository, https://github.com/StefanBruens/StefanBruens.github.io

Everything is in the index.html, which links to the video.ogv and video_time.vtt

ah, great! I did not know if you "generate" any code for the HTML document in https://stefanbruens.github.io/ so this is why I asked but, yeah, the HTML source is clean and easy to read. So, do you have any preferences or suggestions how to continue? If you propose a PR for openQA yourself we can integrate it of course. If you suggest someone else takes the code as template then it would be good if you can confirm someone else may use it, at best licensed under GPLv2, same as openQA. Ok for you?

simplified version merged

So #2605 was merged, #2604 is still marked as WIP. Are there more features being worked on?