Abstract
Because Internet access rates are highly heterogeneous, many video content providers today make available different versions of the videos, with each version encoded at a different rate. Multiple video versions, however, require more server storage and may also dramatically impact cache performance in a traditional cache or in a CDN server. An alternative to versions is layered encoding, which can also provide multiple quality levels. Layered encoding requires less server storage capacity and may be more suitable for caching; but it typically increases transmission bandwidth due to encoding overhead. In this paper we compare video streaming of multiple versions with that of multiple layers in a caching environment. We examine caching and distribution strategies that use both versions and layers. We consider two cases: the request distribution for the videos is known a priori; and adaptive caching, for which the request distribution is unknown. Our analytical and simulation results indicate that mixed distribution/caching strategies provide the best overall performance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abdelzaher T, Bhatti N (1999, May) Web server QoS management by adaptive content delivery. In: Proc. of International Workshop on QoS, London, UK
Chandra K, Reibman A (1999, June) Modeling one- and two-layer variable bit rate video. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 7(3):398–413
Crovella M, Barford P (1998, March) The network effects of prefetching. In: Proc of IEEE Infocom, San Francisco, California, pp 1232–1239
DeCuetos P, Saparilla D, Ross K (2001, April) Adaptive streaming of stored video in a TCP-friendly context: multiple versions or multiple layers? In: Proc. of international packet video workshop, Kyongju, Korea
Fox A, Brewer EA (1996, May) Reducing WWW latency and bandwidth requirements by real-time distillation. In: Proc. 5th WWW conference, Paris, France
Hartanto F, Pawlikowski K, Sirisena H, Kreutzer W (1996, December) Quantitative simulation of telecommunication networks in DESC++. Comput Electr Eng J 22(6):367–381
Kangasharju J, Hartanto F, Reisslein M, Ross K (2002, June) Distributing layered encoded video through caches. IEEE Trans Comput 51(6):622–636
Kim T, Ammar MH (2001, June) A comparison of layering and stream replication video multicast schemes. In: Proc. of NOSSDAV 2001, Port Jefferson, New York
Kimura J, Tobagi F, Pulido J, Emstad P (1999, September) Perceived quality and bandwidth characterization of layered MPEG-2 video encoding. In: SPIE international symposium on voice, video and data communications, Boston, Massachusetts
Ma W, Bedner I, Chang G, Kuchinsky A, Zhang HJ (2000, January) A framework for adaptive content delivery in heterogeneous network environments. In: Proc. of MMCN 2000, San Jose, California
Ortega A, Carignano F, Ayer S, Vetterli M (1997, June) Soft caching: web cache management techniques for images. In: Proc. of MMSP, Princeton, New Jersey
Real Networks. www.realnetworks.com
Ross KW (1995) Multiservice loss models for broadband telecommunication networks. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Shanableh T, Ghanbari M (2000, June) Heterogeneous video transcoding to lower spatio-temporal resolutions and different encoding formats. IEEE Trans Multimedia 2(2):101–110
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
A shorter version of this work has appeared in Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME), Vol. 2, pages 45–48, Lausanne, Switzerland, August 2002
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hartanto, F., Kangasharju, J., Reisslein, M. et al. Caching video objects: layers vs versions?. Multimed Tools Appl 31, 221–245 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-006-0037-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-006-0037-z