> Message du 15/04/19 00:38 > De : "Robert Krawitz" > A : "Jean-Luc CECCOLI" > Copie à : [email protected] > Objet : Re: [darktable-user] Images order in db > > On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 21:58:01 +0200, Jean-Luc CECCOLI wrote: > >> Message du 14/04/19 19:16 > >> De : "KOVÃCS István" > >> A : "Darktable Users List" > >> Copie à : > >> Objet : Re: [darktable-user] Images order in db > >> > >> Hello, > > > >> I have to admit I have not followed this discussion closely. I'd like to > >> know why you care about database IDs? In most databases, the IDs are for > >> internal use only, and have no meaning in the real world (they are not > >> tied to time or filename, for example - the technical term is 'surrogate > >> key'). > >> So, why are the keys important to you? Can't you sort or filter your > >> images based or metadata, that has real-world meaning (e.g. time taken)? > > > >> Kofa > > > > Because I think this is the cause of other behaviours that tend to slow > > down the flow. > > It's possible in extreme cases that this might be true, but that would > .../... > they're read "in order" or not isn't going to matter.
Not sure if I understood all this. I will read all this again when my mind is cooler. > > > When applying a style to many pictures, having the prog reading the files > > to and fro must necessarily be slower than accessing them in a row. > > Maybe not that sensitive on a modern computer with SSD, plenty of fast RAM, > > high performance graphics card aso, but noticeable on an old one with basic > > components. > > Most likely not. See above. > > > Even importing files must be concerned : beginning at the 125th, then back > > to the 43th, then 229th, 1st, 111th, 327th, 12th, etc. must be time > > consumming. > > That simply isn't how databases (and computers, in the case of large > files) work. They don't operate like someone e. g. reading down a > shopping list, and forgetting something because it's not in a > convenient order for how the items are placed in the supermarket . Maybe, but even if it doesn't forget the article, having to go back and forth because the list doesn't follow the articles order must take more time than if it just had to pick them in one pass. > What does "125th, 43rd, 229th, 1st, 111th..." mean, in any case? I mean that instead of loading the files in sequence "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.", as they do are on the disk (which I am certain, since I forced them to be copied in this order), they are loaded randomly. > > > And I believe this is the reason why I have to apply development copying > > many times before the whole collection is complete, for instance. > > If you're applying the same profile to all of the files, it won't > matter. If not -- if you have to do things out of order yourself -- > it might be less convenient for you, but not for the computer. First, I reset the history, to get rid of presets that cannot be cancelled, and then apply Demosaic (AMaZE 5 GL), Higlights and Shadows, Lens correction, Input profile (which seems broken since 2.6.1, btw) and Input profile correction. Further, I may do some other adjustments. > > > Not that bothering with 10 to 15 pictures, but now I have to rework my > > whole collection. And, even with "only" 23k photos, it might save me some > > time, along with some nerve crises (not sure whether the term is correct). > > Is this affecting how you do your work, or is it only about how you > think the computer is doing its work? If you think it's how the > computer is doing its work, I'm curious what you think it has to do. Maybe am I just too much of an hair cutter in four (if this is the right english for this), but if it just could import the files in sequence, it would be fine. Rgrds, J.-Luc ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
