[Digikam-users] Mysql/MariaDb database expert needs...

[Henrique Santos Fernandes]

>
>
> As, the privilegdes cannot be granted from users space, but must be done
> by server admin, the internal solution is a non sense. Sqlite do the stuff
> as well in this situation. As i said previously, trying to run digiKam with
> an internal mysql server will generate a lots of problems, a lots of
> reports, and finaly, only if user is an expert, this will not possible to
> use this way.
>
> So i will drop internal mysql support for 5.0.0
>

All right.. i mean, it is easier to develop like this, one solution only

>
> yes. The way to do it il given below :
>
> CREATE DATABASE digikamdb;GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON digikamdb.* TO
> 'digikamuser'@'localhost' IDENTIFIED BY 'digikamuserpassword'; FLUSH
> PRIVILEGES; GRANT SUPER ON *.* TO 'digikamuser'@'localhost'; FLUSH
> PRIVILEGES;
>

Why do digikam need super?


> The here another pending and very important question :
>
> With digiKam 5.0.0, we will have 3 database to manage :
>
> 1/ Core DB
> 2/ Thumbnails DB
> 3/ Face DB (since libkface is merged in digiKam core)
>
> For each digiKam database we can use a specific name. By default i used
> the name name (digikamdb) here to test, and it work for Core and Thumbnails
> DB. Face DB don't work and investiguations are under progress...
>
> So, the question is : why we have the capability to separate Core,
> Thumbnails, and Face DB with different name (as for ex digikamcoredb,
> digkamthumbsdb, and digikamfacedb) ?
>

I think this is purely organization related right?
I dont realy see any reason why it should be separated.


>
> In my /var/lib/mysql, i can see separated subfolders to host DB ? What's
> the advantage ? backup facilities ? Performances ? What's must be the
> default settings : common name or separated name ?
>

Having separated databases, you will have to adjust the user  grant
permissions for each case as well.
Same for backup, now we have to backup 3 databases for backup digikam.

As far as i know, there is no performance gain in any situation, but you
gain complexity as you will need to create the mutiple users and also, you
may be in a situation where you are not sure in wich database this "data"
should be.

I would vote for a single database, but i am no expert and thougt it was a
design choice to have multple databases.

One reason to have it not as the same, if you wish to use thumbtail on disk
and the rest on mysql, but i guess this will introduce more problens than
any real advantages.


>
> All this point are not clear for me (and also for end users as i can see
> in bugzilla).
>
>
>>
>> I prefere mysql cause it would be possible/easier to use digikam on
>> multiple computers with the same database!
>>
>
> Sure, this is another important feature, which introduce other
> dysfunctions as i can see in bugzilla.
>
> We must investigate step by step, first with simple user cases...
>
> Gilles Caulier
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20151112/124c285e/attachment.html>