I compiled the new version (revision 79e8763) and tried it out on the test images and also on a copy of my main database. The speed improvement is considerable; none of the tagging operations I tried took more than seven seconds to complete. I am looking forward to using this in a stable release.
I have experienced the same kind of delays with tags in the collect module, but, oddly enough, not with this version -- neither selecting the "tag" option, nor selecting a tag to collect by, nor applying a color label to an image in a tag-based collection, took more than two seconds with any database I tried. -- August Schwerdfeger aug...@schwerdfeger.name On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Tobias Ellinghaus <m...@houz.org> wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 3. August 2017, 09:58:01 CEST schrieb Tobias Ellinghaus: > > Am Dienstag, 1. August 2017, 23:45:54 CEST schrieb August Schwerdfeger: > > > I managed to reproduce the problem on a smaller scale using a generated > > > set > > > of 5,000 1x1 PNG images, each annotated with a certain number of tags, > > > with > > > a total of 6,111 across the set. (I will send you these images in a > > > separate message.) > > > > Thanks for that, I was able to reproduce some glacial speeds with that. > > This should be fixed now in master. Some parts are still really slow with > that > many tags though. For example selecting "tag" in the collect module takes > minutes just to show up for me. > > > > When I imported the first 250 of these images into a fresh database in > > > Darktable 2.2.4, attaching one new tag to the lot took about two > seconds. > > > When I imported all 5,000 into another fresh database, attaching the > same > > > tag to the same 250 images took about 10 seconds. > > > > > > I also carried out this same test in Darktable 2.0.7. Importing the > 5,000 > > > images gave me a database file of about 500 megabytes (as opposed to > four > > > with Darktable 2.2.4), and the same tag-attachment operation took four > and > > > a half minutes. When, however, I repeated the operation with the name > of a > > > nonexistent tag in the tagging module text box, it took 10 seconds as > in > > > Darktable 2.2.4. > > > > What I tried was attaching one new tag to the whole lot. It wasn't fun. I > > will investigate, but from a first peek it seems that we are spending a > lot > > of time in sqlite3. So maybe some SQL queries need to be revised, stuff > > might have to go into a transaction or not be done at all. I will see. > > > > > In light of this result, I should mention that the databases I am > having > > > this trouble with were all originally created by Darktable 1.4.2 and > are > > > over 75 megabytes in size. > > > > As it's also slow with a fresh new database we can probably ignore that > > part. > > > -- > > > August Schwerdfeger > > > aug...@schwerdfeger.name > > > > Tobias > > > > [...] > > ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
