On lundi 6 juillet 2020 07:35:59 CEST Michael Mosmann wrote: > Am 05.07.20 um 23:02 schrieb Guillermo Rozas: > > Really, the best option now is the local copies feature. Anything else > > is fighting against the way darktable is designed to work (as a > > standalone local application). You can do it, but, as they say, "you can > > keep the pieces when you break it". > > Just for my understanding: IMHO darktable will modify the image metafile > on any change ... so one could use just some sync tools like nextcloud > to propagate the changes between different computers. > > Is there some information which is not stored in image metafiles and > only stored in the local darktable db? It's the other way around: creating (and updating) sidecar files is optional (Settings -> core options -> XMP). But even if you have all info in sidecars, changes need to get into the database: sidecars being optional, dt uses its database for normal operation.
In any case, there isn't really a problem when dealing with a single user, or when you can *guarantee* single access. The real problems start when there is a possibility of several users accessing the same data. Still no problem when they are only reading data. But when users can also *write* to the same data at the same time (as when they start editing images), accidents (i.e. data loss) will happen, the only question is "when?". A simple example: user A loads an image for editing. B loads the same image to edit. He gets the same version as A. Now A makes some changes and writes those back to the server. Now compare the version B has with the version on the server. And what happens when B then makes their edits, and saves to the server? Preventing such data races is not trivial. Remco ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-user+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
