MrSinatra;578436 Wrote:
> i think you're missing the point i am making... if i change an option
> in SBS, like the ones you or Jim mentioned, SBS should NOT need to
> rescan the files, new or full; it should simply rebuild the SBS tables
> from the tag cache table (phase 1) or better yet it should just make
> ALL the tables it could ever need regardless of the toggle type
> options, and then just switch to those tables when the option is
> changed.
>
Right and this is exactly what I meant with "A rescan from stage 1
database". I can now understand that I should have used another word,
maybe "refresh" instead of "rescan" but we are talking about the same
thing.
MrSinatra;578436 Wrote:
>
> 1. i would rather have a two phase system where you don't need to look
> for fringe cases that you may never even be aware of, but exist
> nonethelss.
>
> 1a. i would rather have a fullproof system that doesn't need
> "attention" to fix like mynb's example.
>
Right and these fringe cases is the only reason I can see to divide the
scanning in two phases.
MrSinatra;578436 Wrote:
>
> 2. i don't want to have to rescan because options change. TPE2 is a
> perfect example. b/c of the dumb "one master list" display SBS uses, i
> have to decide between using albumartist tags for my master sbs list, or
> artist tags, and stick with it, unless i masochistically want to full
> clear and rescan everytime i want to flip between them. dumb!
>
> if both tables for the TPE2 option were made during the second phase of
> a scan, i could just switch between them by toggling the option.
> (although i want to stress that this issue is equally a UI downfall,
> not just a scanning one)
>
> in other words, winamp lets me browse and sort between AA and artist
> via a click, and i can even display them together. all thats a fat NO
> CAN DO on SBS, without screwing with the TPE2 option, and a full
> rescan, YUK!
>
You are assuming that the second phase of a two phase scanner would be
faster. If the second phase isn't faster than the current incremental
scanning based in file system notifications a two phase setup wouldn't
be any better than the current one phase solution.
This is all about performance, it doesn't matter if it scans the file
or refreshes the database based on a phase one database, the only thing
that matters is that it's able to do it very fast.
MrSinatra;578436 Wrote:
>
> 3. the scanner right now is, imo, opaque at best. if you had a raw tag
> table for phase one, you could figure out pretty quick where a problem
> was, be it in how a tag is read, OR in the phase2 logic.
>
There is already a "View tags" link in the SBS web interface and it's a
lot easier to use than looking inside a database for most users.
MrSinatra;578436 Wrote:
>
> 4. all this stuff could happen in the background.
>
Yes and the current scanning also happens in the background, doesn't it
?
The "background" feeling could of course be improved and this is one
reason to have the automatic scanning which is implemented in 7.6.
MrSinatra;578436 Wrote:
>
> i agree with Greg and i thought you...
>
I agree with you that a two phase scanner is a way to make the fringe
cases easier to handle. I don't agree with you that it will necessary
solve all the other problems.
--
erland
Erland Isaksson ('My homepage' (http://erland.isaksson.info))
(Developer of 'many plugins/applets'
(http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/User:Erland). If my answer
helped you and you like to encourage future presence on this forum
and/or third party plugin/applet development, 'donations are always
appreciated' (http://erland.isaksson.info/donate))
------------------------------------------------------------------------
erland's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3124
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82096
_______________________________________________
beta mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
