On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 5:33 PM, David Vincent-Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > The way that one uses the system may play an important role in the > performance question. > > I have a relatively small collection of around 16,000 images and my > approach is to keep (in theory) all of my images selected on an inverse > time basis (Folders>Pictures>%). Thus, as I add images my latest pieces > are, so to speak, located and added on the top of the pile in plain view. > > Since I try not to 'break' the continuity of my storage, my memory (8 > Gb.) holds-up rather well. Searching/locating images or sets of images > is also quite fast. The problems start to occur for me if I jump around > in the data base and call individual folders (ie. breaking-up the > continuity of my 'image stack'. > > Having all of ones images selected initially sounds counter intuative to > an efficient operation but it appears to work on my hardware; I suspect > it simply keeps the cache integrity better.
That sounds like broken behavior to me. You're having to restrict your workflow to a specific pattern that plays well with the cache. Pedro ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
