Hi, Glad you're enjoying Shotwell. I believe what you may be experiencing is a known issue for some of our users: http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/3568<http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/3130>
Currently the startup scan is necessary. If you'd like to monitor our progress on the issue listed above, or add your own comments, please subscribe to it. Cheers, Laura On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:02 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I definitly switched to shotwell 1 month ago. It works quite good and I'm > very happy. > > However one thing is really annoying : the big filesystem scan at launch. > I only have 16k photos and it takes only 1 or 2 minutes. But during that > time, the whole computer interface almost freezes due to a lot of IO on the > HD. > > I had the same problem with rhythmbox. I more or less solved it by using > ionice to launch it. I can do it also for shotwell (didn't try for the > moment) but it may/should be better addressed by the program itself. Don't > know if you already worked on that issue? > > Thanks > > PS : I really don't understand the necessity for such a big scan (in a > user's point of view, though I understand it may be better in a > programmer's point of view). It should be optionnal (but enabled by > default). If shotwell isn't synchronized with the filesystem, it's not a > big usability problem for the user (he knows it's not synchronized!). When > a discrepency is encountered by shotwell (file missing, metadata changed > ...), shotwell can tell it to the user and suggest to launch a manual > rescan. > _______________________________________________ > Shotwell mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell > _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
