<div dir="ltr"><div> Yes I find that digikam is designed for this bias toward retention of data.</div><div>A new user has to discover behavior the behavior which is understood second nature to experience. So I see that disconnected network locations (and obscured,moved,or even deleted files and folders in my testing) do not trigger any destruction of database records.</div><div>This tiny explicit info is not obvious in support materials.</div><div> I am now still on guard to the ways that records do become lost unintentially during file system rearrangements.</div><div> Am i correct to think that the only actual deletion of a database record (ever) is under Maintenance>PerformDatabaseCleansing? In this case I am also wary to not have a casual check sitting in the box "WholeAlbumsCollection" when needing to cleanse just one collection.</div><div> Let me clarify the meaning of "scan" also and be sure that a scan does not lose database records ..... is it fair to say it can only add records?? Scan is one of those broad terms like synchronize when one must ask "which direction" "two way or one way" or what is the input template and what is the output event.</div><div> Is it fair to say that under Maintenance >"scan for new items" depends on the matchmaking features of digikam and it is a one way additive synchronization in which the database is only added to with NO records ever being removed. The Maintenance graphic/text menu has lots of white space to make this explicit for users. Generally menu screen space is often an underused teaching and documentation tool.<br></div><div> Adding a collection is an action with special features in which a new collection can incorporate one or more unused records transferred from former regions of the database (via a matchmaking protocol). The new region defining the new collection however is not the carrier for unused records which do not qualify for inclusion.I will call my programming an infancy unchanged from a lifetime ago, so I dont know how to name and answer question by reviewing code, <br></div><div> Empirically the database seems to be managed so that once a record is in it stays in until manually cleansed. A rescan for new images in a collection at least does a matchmaking against the records which define that collection. But the process setting up a new collection is intriguing. It seems a new collection searches out a new template of file and folder patterns but matches file fingerprints against existing records that can reside in other collections (or at least records that are unused and not assigned to other collections). A future question for study is whether by fingerprint 2 collections can carry the same image item and associated metadata (nonembedded)<br></div><div><br></div><div>Experienced users might point out to me how I am off on an imaginary limb or some may provide the words that shows me how the limb is rightly described and a logical part of the whole tree and I will continue climbing with confidence.</div><div>Ty<br></div><div> <br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 2:40 AM Remco Viëtor <<a href="mailto:remco.vietor@wanadoo.fr">remco.vietor@wanadoo.fr</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On vendredi 22 février 2019 23:49:25 CET Ty Mayn wrote:<br>
(...)<br>
> I have seen preservation behavior even where an old collection is<br>
> hidden by renaming, then unloaded, then replaced by loading a different<br>
> collection with absent files, then pointing to a new pattern of folders and<br>
> files that returns the missing files for inclusion ( rearranged folders).<br>
(...)<br>
Collections on a network or removable drive can be temporarily unavailable <br>
(through accident or design). Throwing away the database records for such <br>
collections would be, let's say, unfortunate, especially when it concerns raw <br>
files (which do not contain user-added keywords, captions etc.)<br>
<br>
Remco<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>