JJZolx;484349 Wrote: > I really wish BMF didn't have to be used this way, but I suppose it will > depend on how quickly the auto-scan will pick up new content. I'm not > really clear yet how well the auto-scan will work. For instance, say I > have a 2100 album, 25000 track library attached and I drop a new album > onto the disk, how quickly would it be expected to pick up the new > album? Does the scanner run continuously in the background, or is it > launched every N minutes? Will it scan more quickly if the server and > player are idle and not streaming music? > > The worst performance I see out of BMF (using big SbS) right now is > when I have a root folder with about 700 artist folders and drop in a > new artist. It takes forever to get past that first branch in the tree. > Picking up a new album from an existing artist seems to work much > better. > > If BMF could just traverse directories and not be expected to find new > and changed content then it would be much more responsive.
Agreed, BMF is nasty right now. However, it needs to do some form of on-the-fly scanning so that you can play something that isn't yet in the database. The new scanner watches for changes using inotify (or other event notification system depending on OS) and so it notices right away you have added a new album and it knows exactly what it needs to scan, it doesn't have to traverse the entire directory structure. -- andyg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ andyg's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3292 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71289 _______________________________________________ beta mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
