frank1969 wrote:
> It was just an idea to keep the "new" quick (and I like it to be
> this quick ;)) to "outsource" options like looking for orphaned entries
> in a separate routine You only use once a week or once a month... (the
> "n" I use daily).
>
>
>
>
> OK, for now I have 3 main
What would such a clean up do which the regular scan shouldn't already
be doing?...
It was just an idea to keep the "new" quick (and I like it to be
this quick ;)) to "outsource" options like looking for orphaned entries
in a separate routine You only use once a week or once a month... (the
"n"
mherger wrote:
> What would such a clean up do which the regular scan shouldn't already
> be doing?...
It was just an idea to keep the "new" quick (and I like it to be
this quick ;)) to "outsource" options like looking for orphaned entries
in a separate routine You only use once a week or
Maybe we could invent something like a "Database cleanup" routine (in
addition to the "new & changed") - I saw something like this in Media
Monkey.
What would such a clean up do which the regular scan shouldn't already
be doing?... I think we have to clearly identify the open issues we
have.
frank1969 wrote:
> Thanks!
> Yes, I have the same experience and sometimes I do it that way (moving
> files to a "quarantine" ordner, do a "new", correct them and
> move them back, do another "new").
>
> But I guess/hope this forum is a chance to make LMS even (still) better
> and find a
slartibartfast wrote:
> I have always found that "new and changed" scan can leave lots of
> unexpected things behind. The only way to be safe is to do a "Clear and
> rescan" or remove incorrectly tagged items, do a "new and changed" scan,
> replace corrected items and do another "new and
frank1969 wrote:
> One bug about cleaning up database, that still exists
> (I just did a clear scan a few weeks ago):
>
> If You correct an artists name (e.g. misspelling), the old artist
> remains in the database although it has NO existing tracks.
>
> e.g.:
> - You have misspelled
