Ok, I think I'm the one who started this thing in another thread: I've got library of about 240.000 MP3 growing (LEGAL btw ;))
So I could tell: mherger;641585 Wrote: > > > - Standard SBS (on a Windows/OSX/Linux) Works finde on WIN XP/WIN 7 with 7.6, hangs with 7.4 and 7.5 (or gets this slow, You can imagine an update scan lasting days or weeks...) mherger;641585 Wrote: > > > - Tiny SBS (on the Touch) mherger;641585 Wrote: > > The reason for the question is the issue that came up in another > thread > > recently where a user had got the information that a 240 000 songs > > library would would work great on Tiny SBS on the Touch. To get it correctly, he told me the performance wouldn't be not far as good as on PC, but it would work without problems - as I told before I was prepared the initial scan takes days ... but it crashes every time > Or does Logitech rely on the community to do all the performance > testing in libraries larger than xxx tracks ?[/color] mherger;641585 Wrote: > However, a general rule of thumb is that a music library containing over > 10,000 tracks should use Squeezebox Server running on a PC or Mac" - but > nobody says that even 1000 will work ok. Just my opinion: People who buy high quality hardware like a Touch will have even more file that s.o. who is running SPS "just for fun" on his PC - so it should be the other way round, I understand why it isn't... Someone who only has 10.000 tracks (this are less than 1.000 CD) is rather unlikely to buy an item like the touch - this is interesting for people like me with a lot of music ;) But to point it out again: I've got NO problems with single bugs or poor performance, I've got a problem with nothing running: SBS 7.4/7.5 - not running on Windows, SBS 7.6 - running fine on Windows - but bugs in Web UI makes it nearly unusable SB Touch - unusable for bugs (or less memory) make scanner crash SP Radio (Nas) - unusuable (or only with tricks) for update scan works but full rescan and initial scan habe a bug... I don't believe that it is a problem of memory reall or is "Update scan" using much LESS memory than the initial scan? IMHO initial scan should be quicker and work smoother, for it can take EVERY file and import it - update scan has to take EVERY file, look throughout the whole database if it already exist, has to look WHAT has changed, has to delete old entrys/tags and fill-in the new ones ... -- Michael -- frank1969 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ frank1969's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=31156 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88867 _______________________________________________ beta mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
