| Summary: | Use database (and thumbs) for 'volatile' local storage (like a git-annex repository) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Applications] digikam | Reporter: | al.t |
| Component: | Database-Thumbs | Assignee: | Digikam Developers <digikam-bugs-null> |
| Status: | REPORTED --- | ||
| Severity: | wishlist | CC: | caulier.gilles, metzpinguin |
| Priority: | NOR | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Platform: | Debian stable | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Latest Commit: | Version Fixed In: | ||
| Sentry Crash Report: | |||
|
Description
al.t
2020-09-30 21:27:14 UTC
Without having read the entire git-annex documentation. I understand correctly that digiKam only sees a 0-byte file via the symlink? Well, then it is clear that when the scan for new items at start runs, it will re-scan these 0-byte images and generate an empty thumbnail. We could certainly ignore 0-byte files when scanning, but Exiv2 would no longer display any metadata either. There would be a lot more problems with digiKam in normal operation with 0-byte images. Maik (In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #1) > I understand correctly that digiKam only sees a 0-byte file via the symlink? Yes, that is correct: git-annex replaces the files with (0-byte) symlinks and allows for a smart way to handle the deletion of parts of the repo. > Well, then it is clear that when the scan for new items at start runs, it will re-scan these 0-byte images and generate an empty thumbnail. So it is intended that the (correct, old) thumbnails get overwritten with an empty thumbnail? > We could certainly ignore 0-byte files when scanning, but Exiv2 would no longer display any metadata either. Just for my understanding: the Exiv2-metadata is not stored in a database but read again each time? > There would be a lot more problems with digiKam in normal operation with 0-byte images. Hmmm... out of curiosity: do you have any other solution to my problem? I assume that my situation is not that uncommon: I have more images than my laptop can handle, so I have stored all them remotely (nfs or external hdd) and only parts of them locally. But I want digiKam to not forget what it had already seen (especially the folder structure, the metadata and the thumbnails). Is there a good solution? I thought git-annex is probably the smartest one, but I'm open to alternatives. Right, digiKam can manage an offline collection. But then nothing should be available anymore. Yes, the metadata sidebar is always re-read. Digikam also keeps some metadata in the database, all of which are possible in the advanced search. So camera model, lens, exposure time, tags, date, etc. Maik We have a similar request for git-annex with regard to sidecars with bug 415949. Maik > Yes, the metadata sidebar is always re-read.
Is there an option to disable the automatic re-reading of the metadata? It would be great if that were an option - especially, if that could be managed on a per-collection basis.
|