IDEA FACTORY // More detailed Log / Multiple DB system / and more codswallop

["donMiguel, el único"]

Yeah well, the offline/online problem was the original kicker for me as 
well, because sometimes the server has holidays.. but for me it is more 
a personal "organization" tick to have the 3 collections separated. if i 
want to listen to classical music, i don't need bands like "the toten 
hosen" or "incubus" in my collection as i am browsing the collection. 
the thing is, that if i listen to a "style", i listen to it for a couple 
days...

furtheron, my machine isn't tooo powerful. so i would avoid bigger 
performance problems by limiting a collection (maybe it's stupid, 
wouldn't know for i didn't try :)

i must admit that i didn't try it with labels, but i'm not really 
tempted... for me, the collection would just be too big with all in it...

i hope my manners of organizing are a little more clearer to you and 
that it not too freaky. (i thought that there may be a few others with 
same needs :) )

greets
Michael


Jeff Mitchell wrote:
> This is an idea that's been kicked around for a while and hasn't yet been 
> implemented.  The original idea for a "multiple collections" type thing was 
> because of people who had various parts of their collections be online or 
> offline at various times having to constantly rescan.  This problem has been 
> mitigated by Dynamic Collections.
>
> I'm a bit confused as to what the issue is with having your tracks in the same 
> database though.  If you want to be able to query on it, for instance, can't 
> you use genre or labels in your queries?  I've never heard of anyone wanting 
> multiple collections for this reason before so if you could explain what 
> you're trying to do and why it'd help.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
>   
>
>