Both browsing folders and playlists do not use the database, so are
slow.
There's a bug for the playlists issue, the folders I doubt anything can
be done.
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1459
James
NOTICE: If received in
Both browsing folders and playlists do not use the database, so are
slow.
There's a bug for the playlists issue, the folders I doubt
anything can
be done.
Why then does 5.x seem to outperform 6.x at the task of browsing folders?
Anytime someone says something can't be done--especially
because ;)
this question has been answered before. There is a lot more than simply
displaying a directory listing (tho it is closer to this if you set your prefs
to sort by filename). It can be optimised more than it is, but no on is
currently sure exactly how.
If you dont believe that, then,
I wonder if this is related in any way to how slow it takes to do a
browse-folder. Like 10 seconds even when there aren't that many items in
the folder. In any event, it's notably slower than in 5.x
Thanks,
Phillip
___
Discuss mailing list
