[Digikam-users] Re: Importing Tags from Images

[Marco Tedaldi]

Hello Martin

Am 06.03.2011 19:56, schrieb Martin (KDE):
> Am Sonntag, 6. März 2011 schrieb Marco Tedaldi:

>> Nice Idea. But my client only has 160GB of disk space. That's not
>> enough for all my images. Speed of the network is not that big of
>> an issue since I could yous rsync and only sync the changed
>> images.
> 
> My clients have 160GB hard disks as well, I sync the DB only (and some 
> pictures located in the users picture folder). Generally I have two 
> photo folders: one global and one user owned. The user one is synced 
> the global one is provided via NFS. digikam DB is located in the user 
> photo folder (with this synced as well).
> 
Oh, now I get it. That's a really neat Idea! Will have to try it.

>>
>>>> This time I wanted to make it better. After the update to
>>>> version 4 had failed I had left it for a while. Now I just set
>>>> up an account on my mysql server for digikam and let it use it.
>>>> Import has run and Imported my almost 50000 images.
>>>> The only problem is, that not a single tag has been imported.
>>>> When I open the images in another editor, I can see, that the
>>>> tags are there, but digikam does not show them (not on the
>>>> image itself nor in the overview).
>>>>
>>>> I'm a bit lost now. Who knows a way to feed the tags, that are
>>>> stored in the images, back into the digikam database?
>>>
>>> There is an option to reread metadata from pictures (but only for
>>> selected photos or one album).
>>
>> Tried it. It did nothing :-(
>>
>> I took a bit a deeper look into it. The Keywords are stored in
>> iptc. If I take a look at the metadata of the image in digikam, I
>> see that the keywords are there.
>>
>> Re-Importing the metadata does not help.
> 
> I never tried it, I usually go the other way around. But a few years 
> ago I move my photos from one folder to another and all tags were 
> imported correctly.
> 
I've killed my sqlite files not for the first time. It always worked
without any problems.

> As I am using raw photos allot, I can not store metadata into files 
> (even if it were possible, I don't like the idea - sidecar files are 
> the way to go here).
> 
yeah. Like darktable is doing. I like this idea as well. The heavily
cluttered image directories are just a cosmetic issue I think.

>>
>> It seems that it is a problem related to the mysql backend. I've
>> opened a bug and found, that there are similar problems with the
>> migration tool when migrating from sqlite to mysql.
>> Also, there seems to be a problem if you're not giving the database
>> user full privileges on your whole database server but only on the
>> used database :-(
> 
> I don't like the idea to use a database server for this. I had many 
> little problems with akonadi (uses mysql server embeded). With every 
> new version of mysql there were other problems. I can not see any 
> advantage that mysql brings. I will stay with sqlite. Easy to back up 
> and I can move it wherever I want.
> 
I like databases. they are fast and convenient. And there are good tools
around to keep them sane .-)
Ok... mysqldump is not as nice as just copying a file around, and MySQL
is notorious for problems when updating from one version to another, but
beside that? :-)
SQL works over the network and only the data, that is needed is moved
over the connection. So there are benefits. And as soon as digikam
becomes multi-user-aware I can see quite some benefits in a real SQL
database (yeah, I know, they say that MySQL isn't a "real" SQL-Database :-))

>>
>> Sadly, it seems that the mysql backend in 1.4 is just broken :-(
> 
> 1.4 is pretty old, isn't it? Can you update to 1.8? May be the DB 
> problems are solved.
> 
Could be. The bug reports are still open.
1.4 is the version which is packaged with ubuntu 10.10. And just update
to 1.8 seems a bit "windows like" to me... I'll take a look at the
changelogs!
Adding another ppa? why not, there are already a few :-)
I'll give it a try.

cu

Marco