mherger wrote: > Make sure you go to Settings/Advanced/Performance and set the database > memory option to "maximum" (if you haven't done so already). This will > allow LMS to use lots of memory for caching. > > -- > > Michael
+1024 but this will not speed up your testszenario!! itm wrote: > I did a trial run by running a dir command manually, then doing a both > -a browse of my main music folder- (on the USB drive) and a search. Both > were still quite sluggish (at least 30 seconds to return a response). > During that time I could hear the -internal- drive of the server getting > hammered (i.e. not the LMS data USB drive). I have a large collection > (90k tracks, 6k albums). > > As a matter of interest, is there anyone out there who has a similar > size collection, and if so what sort of response times do you get when > browsing and searching? The machine is an Intel Q6600 2.4GHz, with 4Gb > RAM, running Win Server 2008. There's nothing much else running on it. you cant compare them. I would opt for a internal "RED" WD Disk -> these are made for NAS = (24/7) if you got a green Disk from WD you will notice a huge impact. You can see just one thin changed (red vs. green) and you cant really compare your setup with the setup from another user. Go for 7.9. to give you an idea: but its older hardware less memory and runs under linux. > Intel Celeron M CPU 420 1.60GHz Debian jessie/sid and LMS 7.9 > > > > - Tracks Total: 75.929 - Albums: 5.304 - Artists: 12.161 - Genres: 253 - Playtime: 5516:20:01 - Scantime: 01:35:44 (clear and scan) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ DJanGo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1516 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105787 _______________________________________________ Squeezecenter mailing list Squeezecenter@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/squeezecenter
