[Digikam-users] Some questions about digikam4.db

Gilles Caulier caulier.gilles at gmail.com
Wed Nov 9 08:26:07 GMT 2011

Hi Anders,

yes, thumbnails storing is probably a side effect of this huge size. I
remember a thread where Francesco and Marcel speak about a problem with
dedicated thumbs DB.

To resume : something have be done between 2.1 and 2.3 to store thumb in
main DB instead dedicated one.

Try this : run digiKam in with a fresh account and look if thumb DB blow up
size when you compute all thumbnails through dedicated batch tool (look
into Tools menu). The goal is to look if this work around is always valid
or if it have been fixed with 2.3.0


Gilles Caulier

2011/11/9 Anders Stedtlund <falolaf at gmail.com>

> Hi,
> I currently use digiKam/kipi-plugins 2.2.0. (Building 2.3.0 at the moment.)
> I just recently looked at the digikam4.db and can see that the size of
> the has suddenly been ~4 times bigger. As I have a couple of backups
> around it seems that when I went from v.2.0.0 to 2.1.0 the db grew
> from ~24MB to ~100MB. I have a history of backups which dates back
> almost a year and the db size has been almost the same, ~24 all the
> time. I have not added that many new images that could explain the
> size.
> I have looked in the tables and I have found that the:
> Images table contains 962 images that doens't have any Album set.
> ImagesTags table have 1628 rows connected to images without an Album set.
> The oldest image is from 2010-07-25. At least some of the images have
> been moved from one album to another. Haven't checked them all. Could
> it be stray entries related to the move? Is there a routine "clean"
> the db from such entries?
> As suggested on the mailing list I have tried this:
> sqlite3 -line digikam4.db 'vacuum;'
> Sure the db size went down but only a MB or two.
> Another reflection:
> There seems to be a new table: Thumbnails. There are 4500 thumbnails
> in that, about 1/3 of my total no of images. I can see that none of
> the latest and none of the earliest images are in there. This table
> could explain most of the db size I think. But is it used and for
> what?
> I would be happy if someone could enlighten me.
> /Anders
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> Digikam-users at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20111109/660d4957/attachment.html>

More information about the Digikam-users mailing list