Replying to this since I have a new theory on what might be going on in
this bug, and which might end up with resolving this issue if someone would
check the code to see if this is the case or not (not that I can't, but I'd
honestly prefer to leave this to someone who knows where to look and is
more familiar with the code base, rather than to miss something important).
What I think is going on is this: Amarok is set to time out and bail out of
the database upgrade after allowing for it to continue on for a set amount
of time (maybe 2 hours or so), after which point, the upgrade is left in an
incomplete state overall. Due to the size of my playlist, which is above
and beyond what the developers tend to expect, I've timed out on several
occasions, and it led me to believe that it in fact wasn't completing the
database upgrade, and was perhaps redoing it each time it launched.
Now, the main reason I mentioned this is that recently, it appears as if I
am finally down to a few minutes of wait time on my last launch, which is a
huge improvement over what it has been. If the upgrade was failing each
time, then I wouldn't expect to see this.
However, if this is closed, I do think that there are perhaps a few
different bugs which might be worth filing upsteam to help avoid this in
the future:
1. Implement a dialog showing the progress on the database upgrade. The
release notes said that this was present, but I never saw it.
2. Don't block on database upgrading and run the upgrade in the background
(but block functionality that depends on that upgrade from working until it
completes). This though, might be a big task though, depending on how the
code's structured.
In any case, just thought that I'd report on this, since I figured this new
information might help a lot in isolating the culprit of this problem. Let
me know what you want done on this.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Ira Rice irar...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Modestas Vainius mo...@debian.orgwrote:
Hello,
On Tuesday 10 July 2012 13:07:23 Ira Rice wrote:
In the NEWS file for 2.6~beta1, it mentioned that for smaller playlists,
there
would be a few minute delay while it updated the database format.
There is no NEWS file in amarok packaging. You are probably referring to
changelog.gz
Anyway, could you exactly quote the changelog entry you are referring to?
I seem to recall getting a prompt of some sort, perhaps from apt-listbugs,
which alerted me to a database upgrade. I don't see it mentioned in the
changelog, and assumed that it was from the NEWS file, because of my own
settings with it.
However, you can see the same announcement about a database upgrade if you
look at the beta announcement for 2.6 beta 1 for amarok (
http://amarok.kde.org/en/releases/2.6/beta/1), where it says: This
release includes a database update that can take up to a few minutes to
complete. A dialog will prevent use of Amarok while this critical change is
applied.
However, I
have a larger database (4600+ tracks in a playlist, with more on disk),
and
this takes more along the lines of 1 1/2 to 2 hours, where it then
doesn't
give any obvious indication that it is then doing anything (but which I
can
verify that it's upgrading the tables through MySQL Workbench).
Can you paste what
$ cat ~/.kde/share/apps/amarok/mysqle/amarok/admin.MYD | od -a -x
returns? You may get more help by reporting the bug to
https://bugs.kde.org
though.
Sure:
000 etx nul dc3 soh nul ~ ff A M A R O K _ T R
00030113fe00410c414d4f525f4b5254
020 A C K soh nul nul nul nul soh nul dc1 nul ~ nl D B
4341014b000100110afe4244
040 _ V E R S I O N bel nul nul nul soh nul nak nul
565f524549534e4f000700010015
060 ~ so A M A R O K _ P O D C A S T
0efe4d4152414b4f505f444f41435453
100 etx nul nul nul etx nul sub stx nul ~ dc3 A M A R O
00030003021afe004113414d4f52
120 K _ U S E R P L A Y L I S T stx nul
5f4b535552454c505941494c54530002
140 nul nul nul nul etx nul etb soh nul ~ dle A M A R O
00030117fe004110414d4f52
160 K _ B O O K M A R K S eot nul nul nul nul
5f4b4f424b4f414d4b520453
200
As for reporting my bug directly, I can't say that I've really had much
success with that in the past in relation to other bugs, and have had more
luck with IRC (which, although they then got fixed, then got reverted back
to where they were before shortly afterwards, which kind of shook some of
my
