How many line do you have in your description file? Could you send me it?boourns wrote:Both browse and view, when you select a new image or view next image it appears to always load the descript.ionxnview wrote:Which problem do you have? When you open a image file in view mode?boourns wrote:Bump this up to the top, I have the same problem with this using 1.97.8 (dated 20 Sept 2010). Was this issue solved earlier and has possibly cropped up again?
XnView vs. ACDSee: Slow..? (High CPU & Memory)
Moderators: helmut, XnTriq, xnview
Re: XnView vs. ACDSee: Slow..? (High CPU & Memory)
Pierre.
Re: XnView vs. ACDSee: Slow..? (High CPU & Memory)
Size varies, definitely over 15k lines/entries right now and 2 MB in size. I can't really send the file since it is work related, but looking at it, it seems fairly standard. "Filename" + space + description field. There are special characters in the description though. It think it should be possibly to recreate something similar for testing.
Definitely has to do with the number of entries and not loading the file though. If I manually copy the descript.ion to another directory and only copy over a few images the same loading time issues occur. When I pad a smaller one with plain text not in descript.ion format it has no effect on loading speed. So even with properly formatted entries that don't exist in the current directory it is also slow.
I did a quick test with a dummy file in a test directory which seems to reproduce the issue for me. Looks like this:
I repeated the last entry for testimage.jpg thousands of times and put two images in the same dir named test.jpg and test2.jpg. Seems to repro the issue. I can send you this set of test files if you like. What's the best way?
Definitely has to do with the number of entries and not loading the file though. If I manually copy the descript.ion to another directory and only copy over a few images the same loading time issues occur. When I pad a smaller one with plain text not in descript.ion format it has no effect on loading speed. So even with properly formatted entries that don't exist in the current directory it is also slow.
I did a quick test with a dummy file in a test directory which seems to reproduce the issue for me. Looks like this:
Code: Select all
test.jpg desc desc desctest
test2.jpg desc desc desctest
testimage.jpg desc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc desc
testimage.jpg desc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc descdesc desc desc
Re: XnView vs. ACDSee: Slow..? (High CPU & Memory)
Just checking in to see if you were able to reproduce this and whether there might be an easy fix?
Thanks!
Thanks!
Re: XnView vs. ACDSee: Slow..? (High CPU & Memory)
Beta works great, thanks!