Hi,
I am working with big (1000+ file) folders. I think XnView need, some viewing speed improvements in certain areas.
These are:
1- Folder pane: "Big" folder names appearing very slowly here. This can be improved.
2- Folder pane: "Off-screen" folders not processed! So when you scroll the tree, you have to wait for showing names. (Should be pre-prepared.)
3- If you click a "big" folder name in tree, you have to wait so much time for begin the showing thumbs. (And within this time, program locks-up.) This speed can be improved.
4- Changing modes between Browser and Viewer (double-click) can be faster.
5- Currentlly using "High quality zoom" algorithm and/or way of using it is performance killer.
I hope these problems is going to solve in future.
Note: You can see, these speed problems solved in other application: CompuPic Pro.
Speed improvements (folders pane and others)
Moderators: helmut, XnTriq, xnview
Re: Speed improvements (folders pane and others)
If you have many subfolders, it's perhaps the problem...AlterMann wrote: 1- Folder pane: "Big" folder names appearing very slowly here. This can be improved.
Yes, right!2- Folder pane: "Off-screen" folders not processed! So when you scroll the tree, you have to wait for showing names. (Should be pre-prepared.)
If you use the cache, XnView read first files and cache before to display it3- If you click a "big" folder name in tree, you have to wait so much time for begin the showing thumbs. (And within this time, program locks-up.) This speed can be improved.
Perhaps no need to re read the file...4- Changing modes between Browser and Viewer (double-click) can be faster.
Currently i have no other way to resize quicker, it's already a optimized algorithm...5- Currentlly using "High quality zoom" algorithm and/or way of using it is performance killer.
Note: You can see, these speed problems solved in other application: CompuPic Pro.
Pierre.
I have an idea about folders: Maybe you can use an internal directory structure cache for displaying folders! Thus does not needed to re-read folders every time.
In a normal PC, files may change a lot, but folders change less. So caching that data is maybe a good idea for speed... (I am not talking about every folders, just thumbnail cached ones.)
Of course, actual folders structure must be check every time. Bu firstly (and instantly) using cached data.
In a normal PC, files may change a lot, but folders change less. So caching that data is maybe a good idea for speed... (I am not talking about every folders, just thumbnail cached ones.)
Of course, actual folders structure must be check every time. Bu firstly (and instantly) using cached data.
Re: Speed improvements (folders pane and others)
Agreed: http://newsgroup.xnview.com/viewtopic.php?t=12852AlterMann wrote: 4- Changing modes between Browser and Viewer (double-click) can be faster.
Get the bugs fixed, THEN start adding features. It sucks, but someone has to do it.
Re: Speed improvements (folders pane and others)
I have noticed that large folders actually load slower with caching enabled than with caching disabled. This is because when thumbnails are not cached, they are generated one at a time and you can continue to browse while this occurs. However, if thumbnail caching is enabled, every thumbnail in the directory is loaded from the cache at once, and XnView does not respond to user input until all thumbnails are loaded.xnview wrote:If you use the cache, XnView read first files and cache before to display itAlterMann wrote: 3- If you click a "big" folder name in tree, you have to wait so much time for begin the showing thumbs. (And within this time, program locks-up.) This speed can be improved.
The solution to this problem would be to load thumbnails from the cache one at a time, or a few at a time, instead of all at once.
Re: Speed improvements (folders pane and others)
IMHO this is the real problem.XnView does not respond to user input until all thumbnails are loaded.
John