Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] Couldn't RB be more DAAP friendly?

["James \"Doc\" Livingston" <doclivingston gmail com>]

On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 13:24 -0400, Peter Colijn wrote:
> On 10/10/06, James Livingston <doclivingston gmail com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure that there is much we can do about it; and as someone else
> > mentioned, DAAP is much quicker because the server sends us just the
> > metadata.
> 
> Are we talking about import or just loading a pre-imported library? In
> the second case, couldn't the metadata be cached locally? I'm not
> necessarily saying that should be done [caching brings a bunch of
> complexities] but it is a potential solution.

I was talking about importing, for which DAAP is *much* faster because
importing will be pulling all the music data (probably gigabytes) versus
the DAAP metadata (a few hundred kb).


Starting Rhythmbox, when the tracks on your library are on a NFS share,
is a bit more complicated. First, Rhythmbox itself should start and read
the library info from disk in the same amount of time - so the window
with the track list should appear just as quick. A few seconds later
Rhythmbox will check that all the tracks still exist and, if library
watching is turned on, add directory monitors.

Those latter two things can take a while on local hard disks, and
obviously take a lot longer over NFS. We've tried to make RB use
asynchronous operations where possible, but there might be some
synchronous code paths which block the UI from being responsive.

When saying "RB is slow to load", does this mean that it takes a while
to finish loading but is responsive, or the UI isn't responsive and
blocks while starting up?


Cheers,

James "Doc" Livingston
-- 
If you wish to live wisely, ignore sayings -- including this one.