<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><tt>Hoi Leo,</tt></p>
<p><tt>are still following the original thread?<br>
Y<tt>our are not the only one who thinks about Multi-User
environment, see </tt><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://bugs.kde.org/buglist.cgi?bug_severity=critical&bug_severity=grave&bug_severity=major&bug_severity=crash&bug_severity=normal&bug_severity=minor&bug_severity=wishlist&bug_severity=task&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=CONFIRMED&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=Database-Multiusers&list_id=1583486&product=digikam&query_format=advanced">digiKam
Bug List Component: Database-Multiusers Product: digikam
Status: REPORTED, CONFIRMED, ASSIGNED, REOPENED </a><br>
</tt></p>
<p>I reckon those are the most recent discussion in this matter:<tt><br>
</tt></p>
<ul>
<li><a
href="http://digikam.1695700.n4.nabble.com/Multi-user-with-mysql-server-td4693390.html">Multi-user
with mysql server</a></li>
<li><a
href="http://digikam.1695700.n4.nabble.com/digiKam-users-Multi-user-digiKam-setup-td4707375.html">[digiKam-users]
Multi-user digiKam setup?</a></li>
<li><a
href="http://digikam.1695700.n4.nabble.com/digiKam-users-Use-digiKam-with-a-NAS-and-MariaDB-td4707031.html">[digiKam-users]
Use digiKam with a NAS and MariaDB</a></li>
<li><a
href="http://digikam.1695700.n4.nabble.com/digiKam-users-temporary-port-photos-and-metadata-from-MariaDB-network-share-for-editing-when-offlinee-td4707511.html">[digiKam-users]
temporary port photos and metadata from MariaDB/network share
for editing when offline / being on the move</a></li>
<li><a href="https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=401622">Wish
401622</a> <span id="summary_container"> - <span
id="short_desc_nonedit_display">Simple multi-user, to start
with</span></span></li>
<li><a href="https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=254099">Wish
254099</a>: <span id="summary_container"><span
id="short_desc_nonedit_display">SCAN : refresh collection
with a script in commandline</span></span><span
id="summary_container"><span id="short_desc_nonedit_display"></span></span></li>
</ul>
<p>Does those ideas/approaches matches/supports your suggestions?</p>
<p>Stefan<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 26.01.2019 um 23:31 schrieb Leo
Gaspard:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87y377xd8m.fsf@llwynog.ekleog.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Oh. So even the MySQL database backend doesn't support concurrent use?
That'll make things harder…
Anyway, thank you for your comment! I haven't really found anything that
appears to handle this use case better than digiKam, so will report here
if/when I get something working! With chat-based end-user-level database
locking, for the time being :)
Cheers,
Leo
Gilles Caulier <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:caulier.gilles@gmail.com"><caulier.gilles@gmail.com></a> writes:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Le sam. 26 janv. 2019 à 02:13, Leo Gaspard <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:digikam-users@leo.gaspard.io"><digikam-users@leo.gaspard.io></a> a
écrit :
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Hello,
I'll try asking just one last time, by decreasing order of importance:
* Is digiKam not unbearably slow when the pictures are on a WebDAV and
the database a remote MySQL?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
The Webdav storing was never tested here, at least be me.
The network is the bottleneck here. Mysql thumbnails storing is the part
which use the network bandwidth a lots. With 6.0.0, Maik has optimized the
network use with Mysql.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""> * Does putting the digiKam database in MySQL put the WebDAV password in
the MySQL?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
No idea...
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""> * Does digiKam work properly with collections on read-only filesystems
and especially read-only WebDAV?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Read only is not a problem is you don't want to change the files data.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""> * Does anyone have any feedback about sharing a digiKam database with
other people (and not only other computers from the same person)?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">This kind of workflow is not implemented yet... You can only sync the file
metadata with database and sync back a remote storage. It's so far not
optimal.
In all cases the database do not contains yet the guards for concurrent
uses.
Gilles Caulier
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">(more details in the quote below)
Cheers,
Leo
Leo Gaspard <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:digikam-users@leo.gaspard.io"><digikam-users@leo.gaspard.io></a> writes:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Hello world!
I have tried IRC to bother the fewest possible people, but it looks like
#digikam@irc.freenode.net is dead, so let's try here. Sorry for the
noise!
I am considering using digiKam, but as my use case is kind of peculiar,
I thought I would first ask whether you think I have chances of
succeeding at what I'm trying to do.
Context: I'm trying to setup a shared photo database with my family for
all our photographs. Photos will be shared over NextCloud, and hopefully
digiKam would be used to both tag them and synchronize the tags. Now,
the photo database is kind of huge, and not all computers are able to
download it in full. In addition, not everyone has the same taste for
photos, so I think it'd be better if everyone only had write access to
their own directory, and read access to others'.
My currently imagined solution:
* Each user puts their pictures in their write-for-them read-for-all
folder in Nextcloud
* Everyone runs a digiKam instances. Tags are synchronized either
through MySQL or by just adding the SQLite database to the Nextcloud
* digiKam is setup to directly fetch the photos from WebDAV from the
Nextcloud instance
So my questions are:
1. Do you have advice on whether to pick MySQL or synchronize the
SQLite database over Nextcloud? (I will have linux, windows and mac
clients) Will sharing the database not risk sharing the WebDAV
credentials?
2. Does digiKam handle well-enough collections on read-only folders?
3. What do you think about the overall idea?
4. Bonus question: Ideally users could also have their own private
databases that are not shared. Does digiKam handles properly
switching between two databases, ideally with one that includes the
other?
5. Trick question: If an answer is no, is there any project other than
digiKam that could handle these requirements and that you would know
about?
I've searched a bit the manual and didn't find much about these
questions, and I must say I'd rather request an opinion from someone
knowledgeable before starting the setup, that will likely be kind of
long and complex, especially if done with MySQL. Sorry if the questions
are already answered someplace I didn't find!
Cheers, and thank you for digiKam that looks like some nice piece of
software!
Leo
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>