I am new to digiKam.
I currently use the database Type: SQLite and everything works quite well. But because I manage about 120,000 photos, I also tried the Mysql-Internal recommended by digiKam, but this makes the program very unstable, it crashes very often. My system: Manjaro Linux.
My question: Can I continue to use the SQLite without hesitation, although I want to manage more than 100,000 photos or would it make sense to get the Mysql to work?
1 Like
There is no reason to use SQLite with more than 100,000 images. If the SQLite DB is on an SSD, it can/is even faster than MySQL over network.
2 Likes
Hello @dkdeveloper,
I am glad that you are still thinking about me.
I have now switched from SQLite to Mysql-Internal and since I downgraded mariadb to 10.5.11-1 Mysql works without problems.
May I ask something else here: When I want to move an album, there seems to be only the method of drag & drop. This is sometimes a bit awkward when the old and the new place where this album should go love far away from each other. Is there no other method?
Thanks in advance
micha
Are you meaning:
There is no reason NOT to use SQLite with more than 100,000 images
or Are you meaning:
You shouldn’t use SQLite with more than 100,000 images
Because I’m still on sqlite and I’m approaching it fast, especially with the new timelapses I’m starting to do.
Thanks
1 Like
Yes, SQLite can manage more than 100,000 images.
Maik
1 Like
Thank you for clarifying
I’m using DigiKam with over 120’000 images on SQLite. Recently, I have moved the DB files from a HD to a SSD. Overall performance is excellent.
1 Like
It didn’t clarify it, though. I don’t doubt that SQLite is able to manage that many files, but why warn against using it if so?
I’d like to know that, too. I often had problems with MySQL when a too new update came out, with which digiKam did not yet cope. That’s why I switched to SQlight. Since then no more problems. And I manage 120,000 photos.