[Digikam-users] Long database sync

[Noeck]

Dear Gilles,

I tested it once again with these settings:
all albums (+ checked), all tags (not checked), multicore and only the
sync from files to the database (no other maintainance tools). The
difference to the last time is: all tags is not checked and the
multicore is selected.

I am now using DigiKam 4.10.0 under KDE 4.13.3.

It is now faster and shows these numbers on average:
load: 4 on four cores
25% CPU, 45% wait
disk read 25 MB/s, write 12 MB/s
It froze about 20 times (and stopped writing and reading) but resumed
after about 10-30 seconds each time.

At 72% it stopped and a message popped up 3 times within 5 min saying
»Der Prozess für das Protokoll digikamtags wurde unerwartet beendet.«
which roughly translates as: »The process for the protocol digikamtags
was terminated inexpectedly.«

The total time was now 27:19, the final message was something like: »All
processes terminated successfully«.
The write rate is probably just the maximum speed of the drive.
The database did not change this time (exact same number of bytes),
which makes sense as there are no new images and no new information in
the existing images. This is now much more consistent with my
expectations. Considering the deadtimes summing up to about 15 min and
the fact that my collection is twice the size of the mentioned 20000,
this is quite close to the other developer.

One more question: My database was created with digikam 2.5 and later
used with 3.5 and 4.2. The switch to 4.9 was very recent. Might it be
that it had to be rewritten drastically for that reason?

tl;dr: Much faster in the 2nd run and with 4.10. Might an old database
be the reason?

Cheers,
Joram


PS @Gilles and all involved developers: Thank you very much for this
great program! I use it for years now and I am very happy with it.



Am 13.05.2015 um 23:18 schrieb Gilles Caulier:
> This is a copy of private mail from another developer who have tried
> to reproduce the problem :
> 
>> The metadatasynchronizer processed TAlbums correctly. I have moved to test my
>> DB on the SSD. My about 20000 images then require approximately 6 minutes. One
>> should of course not select tags, because otherwise will double synronisiert.
> 
> Gilles Caulier