Hi Ralf, An update. After your various fixes, scanning is much faster now (yay QSharedMemory!)
Now it gets stuck at 24%, here is the debug output: http://pastebin.com/HPadHHtf leo On Wednesday, November 03, 2010 06:09:35 PM Ralf Engels wrote: > Hi all, > since this morning (very early) the new collection scanner is integrated. > > It should allow us to implement exiting new features and it also has some > benefits over the old scanner. > > However the change is quite big and we even might want to revert the fix if > serious problems come up. > > For now a short overview about the new features and already known problems. > > - The new scanner should be smarter in figuring out if an album is a > compilation or not. If "compilation" is set by the user this information > should also be saved and used in the next scanning run. - Rating, playcount > and score should be saved and restored. > - The playlist and collection view should be always up-to-date. There might > be an empty album if all songs are removed from one. There should however > never be a case where right-clicking on a track does not bring up a context > menu. - The scanner should be a lot smarter in detecting which cover > belongs to which album. > > known issues: > - Probably the most severe issue right now: The scanning seems to hang > sometimes. Sometimes meaning once every four full scans on my machine. > If you have such a problem: please send me the last few debug output > lines from the scanner. > - The progress bar is not progressing to 100% > Actually I couldn't really figure out yet why this happens but > I will eventually. > - The scanner will mark an album with a single track as compilation more > often than the old one did. I am still not sure if this is good or bad. For > now I think it's a little annoying that a lot of my singles appear under > "various artists". So, if you have any opinions please drop me a message. > - If you see two albums with the same name and artist that appear in the > collection. That is probably an album with two different album artists and > not directly connected to the scanner. > > performance: > - I have done perfomance tests with the scanner processor but not with the > whole scanner as such. The scanner is reading more information than before > but that shouldn't slow it down by much. However lfranchi has reported an > increased scanning time. > If you also have this impression please try to give me some numbers. > The scanning time of 20000 mp3 files on a local disk should be below three > minutes. > > > Any new bugs, complaints or improvement request can be directed to me > directly, IRC, bug tracker or as a patch on the review board. As always. > > Cheers, > Ralf > _______________________________________________ > Amarok-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel -- [email protected] KDAB (USA), LLC [email protected] The KDE Project _______________________________________________ Amarok-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel
