DK Performance: thumbnails and browsing feels extremely sluggish - am I doing anything wrong?

[Thomas]

I have checked the option: *Enable internal debug logging*

I think I also included a screenshot showing this. Here it is again:






On 2023-05-09 09:33, Gilles Caulier wrote:

> You don't needs debug symbols version. Debug traces are only prints on
> the console. Check if you have enabled the internal debug logging
> option from digiKam Setup/Miscs/System dialog page:
>
> https://docs.digikam.org/en/setup_application/miscs_settings.html#system-settings
>
> Default settings from DebugView is enough.
>
> Best
>
> Gilles Caulier
>
> Le mar. 9 mai 2023 à 09:25, Thomas<sdktda at gmail.com>  a écrit :
>> I tried running dbgview as Administrator and enabling various other
>> capture options such as kernel capture, global capture etc. However, it
>> did not seem to make a difference.
>>
>> Do I need a special version of DK with debug symbols compiled in or
>> something like that?
>>
>>
>> On 2023-05-08 18:48, Maik Qualmann wrote:
>>> Create a DebugView log (download from Microsoft). Activate in the digiKam
>>> settings under System-> internal debugging, start digiKam again. Start
>>> DebugView before, do things in digiKam that are slow and post the contents of
>>> the DebugView window.
>>>
>>> Maik
>>>
>>> Am Montag, 8. Mai 2023, 16:01:34 CEST schrieb Thomas:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> First some background:
>>>>
>>>> I have a fairly big collection.
>>>>
>>>> Currently at more than 700 GB and more than 400k images.
>>>>
>>>> Collection is hosted on a NAS over 1 GbE LAN.
>>>>
>>>> The NAS server is plenty fast Xeon machine with 4 disks in RAID-1. The
>>>> files are shared via a samba server on Debian.
>>>>
>>>> I have various client machines but they all express similar behavior.
>>>> The one I use the most is a fairly recent Windows machine with  i7 CPU
>>>> and 64 GB RAM and NVMe disk.
>>>>
>>>> My collection databases and sizes are shown below. Database files are
>>>> hosted locally on the NVMe.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The behavior I experience:
>>>>
>>>> When I click a person in "People" tab, it is often many seconds or even
>>>> minutes before it shows the actual thumbnails of faces for this person.
>>>>
>>>> I just tested this right now by clicking a random person in the list.
>>>> There were only 9 images of this person and it took more than 15 seconds
>>>> before the thumbnails were shown.
>>>>
>>>> I took another person and did the same. This person had more than 8k
>>>> images. They were shown immediately in the top. But scrolled a but down,
>>>> the thumbs were blank. So I did that and waited. It took several minutes
>>>> (more than 2) for the thumbs to be shown this far down (probably about
>>>> 10 % scroll down). I then scrolled a bit further down and they were
>>>> blank also. Took several minutes for DK to show thumbs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are these thumbnails not cached in the thumbnail database?
>>>>
>>>> I mean, all the DK database files are less than 6 GB. They can easily
>>>> fit in RAM. Even if they had to be read from the NVMe, the entire 6 GB
>>>> can be read from NVMe disk in less than 7 seconds. (tested it using raw
>>>> read of the files without them being cached).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Another issue happens when I go to Albums and find some image. Then
>>>> doubleclick it to open the image in preview mode. It often takes several
>>>> seconds to open the image. Now, I am not sure if the preview is actually
>>>> loaded from the NAS or if it is loaded via the thumbnaildb? But it not
>>>> unusual for this to take 5 seconds or more. This makes browsing images
>>>> feel extremely sluggish.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So what is happening here? Is it something wrong in my setup?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is the most likely bottleneck here?
>>>>
>>>>    1. The database files? If so, are they properly indexed? Are the proper
>>>>       settings used relating to sync, locking, etc? Are the databases
>>>>       loaded into memory or cached in memory when there is sufficient RAM?
>>>>    2. Is the NAS to blame? I monitor performence metrics relating to disk
>>>>       and I/O on the machine and I see no obvious bottlenecks / high
>>>>       utilization on the server while doing the above actions with DK.
>>>>    3. Is the samba network protocol to blame?
>>>>    4. Hardware on client or server (I have a hard time seeing this being
>>>>       the case)
>>>>    5. Is it the network bandwidth between NAS and clients? This is low
>>>>       latency 1 GbE ethernet. It can easily do about 100 MB/s and I have
>>>>       verified this using iperf.
>>>>
>>>> Could it be something else entirely?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would love to hear other users' experiences with how DK performs as
>>>> well as your collection/db sizes as well as client and server specs.
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Mvh
>> Thomas
>>
-- 
Mvh
Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20230509/a975029a/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DlTmzlwTLNCfSEBx.png
Type: image/png
Size: 19410 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20230509/a975029a/attachment-0001.png>