Jason Tackaberry wrote: > On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 22:12 +0100, Duncan Webb wrote: >> This last change has made a huge difference loading the web library >> image pages when the images are large; 7.2 mega pixel cameras generate >> jpegs at about 3 MB, so I guess that not having to read the image in to >> determine the size has made the difference. > > kaa.metadata shouldn't scan the whole file for jpgs. Why would the size > of the file make a difference? I can certainly see it'd be easier to > pull the image's size from a warm cache, but when you have to open the > file to read the metadata, I don't quite see why a 3MB file is different > from a 200k file.
May not make a difference, haven't too many small images to check against. All I have noticed is that nobody else has said that the images library was slow. The speed difference is a factor of between 5 and 10 times faster, so I was assuming that it had something to do with the size. Duncan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Freevo-devel mailing list Freevo-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freevo-devel
