PDA

View Full Version : Slimserver scan procedure needs some serious work!



inv
2006-08-13, 10:06
Facts about my system

- Newly installed windows xp on decent workstation.
- Newly installed Slimserver (6.3.1).
- Only 600 mp3 files (rescanning now for the second time after beeing moved).
- No itunes.

Slim.exe has now been running for 1-2 hours at 99% cpu, with a peak physical memory usage of 235 mb (and counting), and an average of about 200 mb.

What the hell is wrong? How hard is it to read 600 mp3 files and their ID3 info? I suggest that the Slimserver dev team give this job to someone other than the summer intern.

Keep in mind that this is a product meant to be run on any desktop, and that it totaly dominates the user environment by stealing all cpu. Perhaps the developers could learn something from desktop search products (such as google desktop), by only using cpu when the user is not interaction with the system. The manual clearly states that requirements for slimserver is 256 mb of ram. Well, that leaves 20 mb for my windows, and the rest of my apps. Hey...peak is now 245 mb...make that 10 mb.

Ben Sandee
2006-08-13, 10:21
On 8/13/06, inv <inv.2chnen1155489001 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> What the hell is wrong? How hard is it to read 600 mp3 files and their
> ID3 info? I suggest that the Slimserver dev team give this job to
> someone other than the summer intern.


Feel better now?

mherger
2006-08-13, 10:22
> What the hell is wrong?

Does your music folder contain playlists or shortcuts?

--

Michael

-----------------------------------------------------------
Help translate SlimServer by using the
StringEditor Plugin (http://www.herger.net/slim/)

kdf
2006-08-13, 10:35
What the hell is wrong?

I'd offer to help, but I'm only an intern.
-kdf

inv
2006-08-13, 10:42
Ben Sandee : I do actually. Both because of what I wrote, and because slim.exe just got the old kill command. ;)

mherger: Should it matter if my musicfolder contains shortcuts and playlists? And to answere the question..no shortcuts, some playlists. In other words, nothing unusual.

kdf: So, did you program the scan procedure? ;)



Attached screenshot from task manager. Only 2 threads for slim.exe.....hmmm..

kdf
2006-08-13, 10:52
Why don't you try using the debug techniques at your disposal before
you start slinging insults.

server settings->debugging

start with d_import, d_scan, d_parse.

d_info is another one to look at if you want to watch the entire
content to tags.

the log is available from a link in the description text, or you can
run the server from command-line with --logfile=xxxx as an argument.

Also consider having a look at 6.5, which splits the scanner
application off as a separate application. you can run it to your
hearts content and watch the progress.
-kdf

inv
2006-08-13, 11:03
Well, I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings (Why? I'm merely stating facts about my system), but for the price i payed for the device i would expect it to work (out of the box). Afterall, the scan is a pretty important part of the system. And hey, everything else works great. With some exceptions I think its a good product.

And I'm guessing that you did write the code =) Btw, now i cant even start the webinterface, because when i fire up slimserver, it starts using 99% cpu right away...6.5 might be the answere

pfarrell
2006-08-13, 11:14
inv wrote:
> Well, I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings,

Bull, it was intentional flame bait.

> but for the price i payed for
> the device i would expect it to work.

How much did you pay for the server software?

Did you try it before you bought the hardware?
You did realize that you can test the system and play
tunes without buying anything. The server runs
on nearly every OS around and softsqueeze is free
and you can play through WinAmp and other players
all for free.

If you tried it, and disliked it, why did you buy the
hardware? If you didn't try it, why not?

But really, I'd rather you go back under your bridge.


--
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html

inv
2006-08-13, 11:24
As i said...I do like the product, i just thing that the 6.3.1 scan procedure is totally useless.

So your saying that I shouldnt be allowed to demand that the server (which in deed is free) works..which the device depends on to do what it promises to do (play my mp3s). No server, no mp3s on my sqeezebox...

kdf
2006-08-13, 11:27
On 13-Aug-06, at 11:03 AM, inv wrote:

>
> Well, I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings,

you didn't. what you did do, is show your troll skin before doing
proper research. This says more about you than anything you have
claimed about myself or anyone else you think is somehow grouped with
me.

> but for the price i payed for
> the device i would expect it to work. Afterall, the scan is a pretty
> important part of the system. And hey, everything else works great.
> With some exceptions I think its a good product.
>
> And I'm guessing that you did write the code =)
>
Keep guessing. Eventually you'll find that guessing and flinging
insults results in a low probability of fixing.

When you are ready to ask for help, I'm perfectly willing to give it.

-kdf

kdf
2006-08-13, 11:33
On 13-Aug-06, at 11:24 AM, inv wrote:

>
> As i said...I do like the product, i just thing that the 6.3.1 scan
> procedure is totally useless.
>
subjective claim, based on sample set of 1.
Thus, the claim is baseless.

Please take some time with previously given instructions or contact
support (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com for one to one support.
Let's figure out the cause before making unsubstantiated claims.
-kdf

stinkingpig
2006-08-13, 11:40
On 8/13/06, inv <inv.2chnen1155489001 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
>
> Facts about my system
>
> - Newly installed windows xp on decent workstation.
> - Newly installed Slimserver (6.3.1).
> - Only 600 mp3 files (rescanning now for the second time after beeing
> moved).
> - No itunes.
>
> Slim.exe has now been running for 1-2 hours at 99% cpu, with a peak
> physical memory usage of 235 mb (and counting), and an average of about
> 200 mb.
>
> What the hell is wrong? How hard is it to read 600 mp3 files and their
> ID3 info? I suggest that the Slimserver dev team give this job to
> someone other than the summer intern.
>
>
The software's behavior indicates a loop... you probably have a playlist or
a shortcut which is causing it to circle around like a dog chasing its tail.
Use a debug flag to find the problem, and fix it.

Your behavior indicates either improper rearing, which is something you'll
need to bring up with your parents or guardians, or a temporary lapse in
civility; further testing will be required to isolate the issue.
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

inv
2006-08-13, 11:43
The only thing i know is that i spent 200 on a device. I download the latest server (which the manual clearly states). And it doesnt even work on perfect conditions.

This is supposed to be a consumer product. You cant expect that people switch to debug mode to trace your mistakes. Or download the latest alpha release (which probably doesnt work anyhow).

I work for a company that has been developing search solutions for 5 years. Trust me when I tell you that the scan can be done a whole lot better.

A troll is an insult, stating that my machine is not responding is not.

inv
2006-08-13, 11:47
I suggest you search the forum (6.2.2 but still):

6.2.2 scan needs hours and hours to complete
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24085&highlight=slim.exe+cpu

Scan takes days to complete
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=22612&highlight=slim.exe+cpu

inv
2006-08-13, 11:51
stinkingpig said:
The software's behavior indicates a loop... you probably have a playlist or
a shortcut which is causing it to circle around like a dog chasing its tail.
Use a debug flag to find the problem, and fix it.

Okey. So why did it work the first time around? I simply moved the files to another folder and started a rescan? And how hard is it to detect a loop? I'm sure there are some patterns out there for the intern to look at..

Philip Meyer
2006-08-13, 12:13
I'll take the bait...

>And it doesnt even work on perfect conditions.
>
I somehow can't believe that your machine is "perfect conditions".

There are many customers using 6.3.1 (probably quite a few using "imperfect conditions"), and most have not reported major scanning issues.

It is more likely that there is something wrong with your installation, music library or machine. You can call or email support, or raise a bug. Of course, the more information you provide the faster your problem can be fixed.

>This is supposed to be a consumer product.
It is. Many people have bought the product and it works for them.

>You cant expect that people switch to debug mode to trace your mistakes.
No, but the option is there for the ones that are inclined to help solve a problem. You are more likely to get your problem fixed quickly if you include useful information.

>Or download the latest alpha release (which probably doesnt work anyhow).
It does actually. And scanning is much faster.

>I work for a company that has been developing search solutions for 5
>years. Trust me when I tell you that the scan can be done a whole lot
>better.
>
Patches welcome ;)

Phil

funkstar
2006-08-13, 13:11
And it doesnt even work on perfect conditions.
Obviously not perfect conditions or it would have worked without issue :)

davep
2006-08-14, 05:40
I simply moved the files to another folder and started a rescan?
Could it be that the playlists still point to the original folder location? That would probably cause the effect you are seeing and account for why it worked ok before.
davep

lanierb
2006-08-14, 09:37
I just wanted to state what the other posts haven't: there are hundreds if not thousands of people using 6.3.1 and having no trouble with the scan procedure (other than it being a little slow, but 600 files shouldn't take more than a minute I wouldn't think). Thus, the original poster's setup/library/etc is clearly somewhat unique, and is causing the problem.

Given that, the approach of coming in here guns blazing was fairly off-putting. It's nice to see that the people here are still willing to help him solve his problem.

dwc
2006-08-14, 14:24
I think DaveP is on to it. If you "simply moved" your music library including playlists, you may have in effect just broken your playlists.

iSix
2006-08-15, 07:33
How can you be sure it's slimserver at fault, and not a configuration issue your end as already pointed out?
I run slimserver on a linkstation, which is only 266Mhz and 64MB ram, yet it works fine.

Patrick Dixon
2006-08-15, 08:27
I think DaveP is on to it. If you "simply moved" your music library including playlists, you may have in effect just broken your playlists.
I'm sure that's the answer, however I also think it's legitimate to ask why the scanning process doesn't recover gracefully from such an error.

kdf
2006-08-15, 09:08
On 15-Aug-06, at 8:27 AM, Patrick Dixon wrote:

>
> dwc Wrote:
>> I think DaveP is on to it. If you "simply moved" your music library
>> including playlists, you may have in effect just broken your
>> playlists.
> I'm sure that's the answer, however I also think it's legitimate to ask
> why the scanning process doesn't recover gracefully from such an error.
>
I propose we call it the Music-handling API for Gracefully Ignoring
Crap. MAGIC for short.
On seeing playlists with files that don't exist, it will instantly
determine whether the users desire is to index everything and skip
missing files so that the user doesn't have to keep fixing playlists,
or whether the user has simply moved a bunch of files and wants the
playlist scan to save time and just stop checking the files at all.
(kidding, of course)

For now , no one can know what the problem actually is. It is not a
normal condition, but with refusal to have anything to do with logs and
debugging, the only options are to hope the user will ship the computer
to tech support for examination, or get over it and try the debugging
switches suggested. Otherwise, it is only speculation (which is,
arguably, more fun for the forum). It could just as easily not be
playlists; there are often cases where a user doesn't mention something
initially that turns out to be critical information. Again, without
logs, there is no next step.

Answer to the question: missing files shouldn't take that long to
determine as missing, but there could be any number of playlists with
any number of tracks. The scan could be made to quickly dump any
playlist that starts showing more than a few files pointing outside the
music folder, but the users who insist in being able to link to files
outside the music folder for use with their favourite other music
managing software end up losing out. The scan is only as good as the
data it finds. Period. If there really is a problem, then the logs
will show it and it will be fixed or at least there will be
instructions on what needs to be corrected in the data. In the absence
of logs, then it's just a rant. Fine too, but there are then less
resources to help change the conditions that caused the need to rant.
-kdf

Patrick Dixon
2006-08-15, 10:08
On 15-Aug-06, at 8:27 AM, Patrick Dixon wrote:

>
> dwc Wrote:
>> I think DaveP is on to it. If you "simply moved" your music library
>> including playlists, you may have in effect just broken your
>> playlists.
> I'm sure that's the answer, however I also think it's legitimate to ask
> why the scanning process doesn't recover gracefully from such an error.
>
I propose we call it the Music-handling API for Gracefully Ignoring
Crap. MAGIC for short.
On seeing playlists with files that don't exist, it will instantly
determine whether the users desire is to index everything and skip
missing files so that the user doesn't have to keep fixing playlists,
or whether the user has simply moved a bunch of files and wants the
playlist scan to save time and just stop checking the files at all.
(kidding, of course)

For now , no one can know what the problem actually is. It is not a
normal condition, but with refusal to have anything to do with logs and
debugging, the only options are to hope the user will ship the computer
to tech support for examination, or get over it and try the debugging
switches suggested. Otherwise, it is only speculation (which is,
arguably, more fun for the forum). It could just as easily not be
playlists; there are often cases where a user doesn't mention something
initially that turns out to be critical information. Again, without
logs, there is no next step.

Answer to the question: missing files shouldn't take that long to
determine as missing, but there could be any number of playlists with
any number of tracks. The scan could be made to quickly dump any
playlist that starts showing more than a few files pointing outside the
music folder, but the users who insist in being able to link to files
outside the music folder for use with their favourite other music
managing software end up losing out. The scan is only as good as the
data it finds. Period. If there really is a problem, then the logs
will show it and it will be fixed or at least there will be
instructions on what needs to be corrected in the data. In the absence
of logs, then it's just a rant. Fine too, but there are then less
resources to help change the conditions that caused the need to rant.
-kdfI'm all for MAGIC.

ModelCitizen
2006-08-15, 13:11
This thread seems to be getting perilously close to a small bugbear I have.
I add a playlist from my computer upstairs and would ideally like to go downstairs to listen to the playlist instantly on my hifi. I can't though because SlimServer insists on scanning all my files when I just add one simple playlist that indexes file already in it's library. So, it becomes at least an hour before I can listen to it (I do not run Slimserver on a very powerful machine).

In my (probably shortsighted) world I'd like SlimServer just to recognise the Playlist when I add it without trying to follow all the links to the tracks. If I've screwed up the links to the tracks, fine, when I try to use the playlist I'll just get "File Not Found" or somesuch.

As ever, interested to know why this is not a good idea/not possible.

MC

geoffb
2006-08-15, 14:24
On 8/15/06, ModelCitizen wrote:
>
> This thread seems to be getting perilously close to a small bugbear I
> have.
> I add a playlist from my computer upstairs and would ideally like to go
> downstairs to listen to the playlist instantly on my hifi. I can't
> though because SlimServer insists on scanning all my files when I just
> add one simple playlist that indexes file already in it's library. So,
> it becomes at least an hour before I can listen to it (I do not run
> Slimserver on a very powerful machine).

Have you tried going to Server Settings | Rescan Settings | Only
Rescan Playlists?
This doesn't give you the instant result, but should still be faster
than rescanning everything, I would think?

Cheers
Geoff

ModelCitizen
2006-08-15, 14:42
Yes I have, but it's still humungously slow...probabably because I have existing playlists that reference large amounts of my existing music library.
I don't understand why scanning a new playlist means that SlimServer is required to scan all the music that any existing playlist references. Surely it does not need to scan any music files at all when a new playlist is added?
MC

MrSinatra
2006-08-15, 17:26
How much did you pay for the server software?

this is without a doubt, the most intellectually bankrupt reply one can have to someone who has a problem.

tell me, if i buy a new car, and they give me free this and that, and those things break, am i not in the right to go back to the dealer and complain just b/c they were given to me freely?

hell, in this case, using SS isn't even optional, b/c nothing else powers the hardware.

you guys are often way too hard on noobs, it simply isn't cool. i think you guys get off on it.

Inv, not everyone thinks you're wrong. i can see where the elders here could get tired of complaints or repeated questions, but i don't see why you should be ganged up on b/c of it.

and btw, occassionally the scan process kills my system too, seemingly for no reason. i simply start it over again. i also set it to scan every night, but often a manual clear and rescan is required. hopefully in ver 6.5 a lot of these issues will be much better off.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-15, 17:47
Hell, I;m just a simple guy. I've been using slimserver since 5.4.0.

Scans just work for me.

For most of 2 years now.

Every time I hit scan, it scans. A bit slower than I'd like, up to 20 minutes or so now for 8500 or so MP3s. But it never fails.

I have a half dozen playlists, they're all radio stations except I think 2 that are once a year things (like xmas songs).

I guess I'm just too untrusting to try all the tricky things that other people do, like making playlists and then moving the files. Or remapping their music libraries to networked drives on the far side of the galaxy. Or cue sheets.

I like the KISSIWP principle. Keep It Simple So It Will Play.

And like any feature rich software, when I go to do new things, i test them extensively.

On my DJ system, I still run Slimserver 5.4.0 . It works.

I do the same with my linksys routers, and every other piece of high tech crud I run. I upgrade when I think I'm missing something, and I always know what my downgrade path is before I start.

MrSinatra
2006-08-15, 17:55
well said.

have u tried a newer version tho? i find with most software, upgrading is mostly safe, and the newer features and bug fixes are nice.

also, until i got newer firmware, internet streams wouldn't play nice for me for long periods, so it was really necessary, don't u run into that?

Mark Lanctot
2006-08-15, 17:59
you guys are often way too hard on noobs, it simply isn't cool. i think you guys get off on it.

Actually I believe people here are very good with newbies. They are hard on people that insult the very people who can help them, and they're certainly justified in doing so.

Yet despite this there are still people willing to help the OP. No idea why.

Being rude to the people who can help you (and who aren't being PAID to help you) is shooting yourself in the foot. The tech support people are paid to help you. It's grossly discourteous to be rude to them but it's their job. No one seems to care about courtesy anymore though, it's all me-me-me.

chiphart
2006-08-15, 18:05
MrSinatra wrote:
> Inv, not everyone thinks you're wrong. i can see where the elders here
> could get tired of complaints or repeated questions, but i don't see why
> you should be ganged up on b/c of it.

I'm quite sympathetic to his cause - even WITH the error logs
turned on, the scanning process (and much of what the slimserver
does) happens behind a black curtain that intimidates 99% of the
world. I, like many here, have recommended my shiny black
friend to everyone I know...but I don't look forward to the
sysadmin duties that follow.

That said, waltzing in here and suggesting that they not have the
"summer intern" write the scanner code was puerile. Slimdevices
has an official support process - acting like a jerk among those
who freely help isn't on the list.

I don't think any of the replies, even kdf's! :-), was out of
line.

--
Chip Hart - Pediatric Solutions * Physician's Computer Company
chip @ pcc.com * 1 Main St. #7, Winooski, VT 05404
800-722-7708 * http://www.pcc.com/~chip
f.802-846-8178 * Pediatric Software Just Got Smarter.
Your Practice Just Got Healthier.

MrSinatra
2006-08-15, 18:08
well, i hear you guys, and i'm not saying you're wrong, its your opinion / pov and thats fine, but seriously, if i buy something, lets say a rocking chair, and it wobbles more than it rocks, i might go to the manufacturer, and give them "the business" instead of more business, if you get me...

i mean come on, most people when they buy stuff, don't expect problems... i don't see why "code" or computer products deserve a pass from anything else money can buy.

what he said was to me, hardly out of line or insulting, imo. it was, the kind of thing i'd expect to hear, from someone who was unhappy with a purchase, and it was pretty friggin tame.

and its hardly the only time, noobs get run out of town on a rail for committing the crime of offending someone elses sensibilities. i just don't think its right.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-15, 18:32
well said.

have u tried a newer version tho?

Yes, I run 6.2.2 on my home system.

But my DJ system uses features they removed in 6.


i find with most software, upgrading is mostly safe, and the newer features and bug fixes are nice.

I trust no upgrades, from no one. Yes, they're usually safe, but I have a backup plan. Except for the windows updates. So many of these days can't be removed once installed. :-(


also, until i got newer firmware, internet streams wouldn't play nice for me for long periods, so it was really necessary, don't u run into that?

DJ system only plays MP3s, isn't connected to the internet when I'm DJing.

Never tried internet streams before 6, not sure why. They work in 6, dunno about 5.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-15, 18:49
Let's get a few things straight here.

This is not the official support channel for Squeezeboxes. That is very clearly support at slimdevices dot com.

They're paid for it, they have the best data about what routers work with what, etc. They're authorized to handle returns for defective units, etc, etc, etc.

If you don't want to get the official Slim Devices support, for some reason (don't know why, it's quite good), you can also come here and ask.

This is mostly a discussion forum ("has anyone tried this unsupported configuration", "do other people find that some of the functions of the add button on the remote are counter-intuitive", etc) but you can sometimes get limited support here. If you don't bite the hand that types the response.

But here, all the people are volunteers. You may be able to get an answer at 4AM California time when support is closed, but it might not be the same answer you'd get from the official channels.

As far as I'm concerned, insulting the people here who are volunteers totally unconnected to Slim Devices, not paid by them, not reporting to them, not (in general) writing code for them, just helping out out of the goodness of their heart and love of the box, is just nekulturny.

MrSinatra
2006-08-15, 18:51
well, he directed his "insult" at the slim server dev team, not people here, and it wasn't an insult, it was a complaint, lets not be so thin skinned.

he was attacked, not the other way around.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-15, 19:00
That's factually incorrect. He wrote:


And I'm guessing that you did write the code

after saying that the quality of the code was such that it had to have been written by an intern. I think the implication is clear.

Jacob Potter
2006-08-15, 19:27
On 8/15/06, Michaelwagner
<Michaelwagner.2cm1ib1155693901 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> after saying that the quality of the code was such that it had to have
> been written by an intern. I think the implication is clear.

As an intern myself (although not at Slim Devices!), I resent that
implication. :)

- Jacob

Jacob Potter
2006-08-15, 19:30
Er, that slight against interns... maybe implication isn't quite the right word.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-15, 19:44
A good point.

Intern shouldn't imply sloppy, and we shouldn't assume it did.

MrSinatra
2006-08-15, 23:53
That's factually incorrect. He wrote:



after saying that the quality of the code was such that it had to have been written by an intern. I think the implication is clear.

no, its not "factually" incorrect. his first post starting the thread was the one he got jumped on for. you are refering to a later post * after * he was attacked.

and even if you had been right, i don't read that bit the same way. when he says that, he appears to be trying to be more agreeable, not make things worse. thats my read of it.

everyone is way too sensitive about complaints, which are more or less, legitimate.

kdf
2006-08-16, 00:00
I'll just interrupt this little share-fest for one more attempt at
asking for logs. As this thread, like so many others, is
long-digressed from its original purpose, please consider mailing logs
(using my previously posted debug options) to support (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com
for 6.3. They can then file a bug if necessary or help you find any
problems. If you try out 6.5, post the related logs to the Beta forum
if you wish to have some help sorting out any problems that may still
exist in the 6.5 scan, or to help narrow down anything that might need
to be cleaned up in the source data.

thanks and don't forget the group hugs when you are done.
kdf

MrSinatra
2006-08-16, 00:16
dumb question[s]:

where do you find the logs? are they always being made? do you have to enable debug stuff? are there multiple logs? do they autodelete after a time?

and i prefer sloppy kisses.

Philip Meyer
2006-08-16, 00:33
Oh no, I've got mailing list replies that are connected to the wrong threads again. Damn forum users.

I can see that the "message-ID" header item has been made bigger than it used to be, but sadly it's still not unique. As a result, a reply can end up threaded to some other message, and therefore I miss messages, or read messages that I've already marked as ignore. It's making the mailing list unusable.

Bug 2712 was raised over 8 months ago - it desperately needs fixing.

Phil

pkfox
2006-08-16, 03:26
I think DaveP is on to it. If you "simply moved" your music library including playlists, you may have in effect just broken your playlists.

Hi there, my Linux box is also very slow scanning (I only have 3200 files, scan can take up to a day ~12 hrs ) do playlists (I've never knowingly created one) always have a .m3u extension ?

regards

Michaelwagner
2006-08-16, 05:50
I thought the first post *was* offensive.

In any case, let's skip the netiquette and get to the heart of it.

Where your logs are depends on what system you're running.

For a windows system, KDF posted the answer some number of replies back.


server settings->debugging

start with d_import, d_scan, d_parse.

d_info is another one to look at if you want to watch the entire content to tags.

the log is available from a link in the description text, or you can run the server from command-line with --logfile=xxxx as an argument.


That might have been a bit cryptic.
On the left pane of the web interface,
select server settings
select debugging
turn those options on that KDF described and hit the change button.

Then, it's a bit hard to see in the default skin, but at the end of the top paragraph, it says "You can view the most recent log entries here". The word here is a hotlink. Click it and the log will open.

If you cut and paste from there into this thread or email the results to support, either way, it gives the people with the skills to solve the problem some handle on what's going wrong.

Slimserver is such a rich and complex product, a million things could be happening, and playing 20 (more like 20,000) questions isn't very productive.

geoffb
2006-08-16, 08:22
On 8/16/06, MrSinatra wrote:
>
> Michaelwagner Wrote:
> > That's factually incorrect. He wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > after saying that the quality of the code was such that it had to have
> > been written by an intern. I think the implication is clear.
>
> no, its not "factually" incorrect. his first post starting the thread
> was the one he got jumped on for. you are refering to a later post *
> after * he was attacked.

Read it again, sam. The original post said:
>I suggest that the Slimserver dev team give this job to
>someone other than the summer intern.

Whether this kind of statement is appropriate is irrelevant.
If you own a car, and you have problems with it, you either ask, or
rant at, the manufacturer - and they fix it either way.
If you instead show up at an enthusiast meeting, complain loudly about
how bad the car is, how shoddily it's made, oh, and by the way, I have
a problem with my carb, could someone help me? - don't be surprised if
you not only don't get any help, but get criticised for your
behaviour.

If you want to rant, do it at your spouse or significant other.
If you want to get help, ask here, and be prepared to dig a bit.
If you want to rant AND get help, do it at the paid support people
(but please, spare them the rant if you can - they're human too).

This is an *enthusiast* group. Help is given in the spirit that it's asked for.
And the obligatory on-topic piece: Take a look at the wiki entry
regarding log entries:
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?LogFile

Cheers
Geoff

kdf
2006-08-16, 08:31
On 16-Aug-06, at 12:16 AM, MrSinatra wrote:

>
> dumb question[s]:
>
> where do you find the logs?

Windows:
c:\program files\slimserver\server\slim.exe --logfile c:\mylog.txt

or a view of the "live log" at http://<serverIP>:9000/log.txt

Linux RPM:
/tmp/slimserver.log

OSX:
~Library/Logs/slimserver.log

> are they always being made?

osx and linux, yes. windows, no. The live log is a section of log
kept in memory, or you can create a file as above. Whatever debug
switches you add on the command line, or enable from server settings
will determine the type of content.

> do you have
> to enable debug stuff?
yes

> are there multiple logs?
no

> do they autodelete
> after a time?
>
no, but they aren't being built up unless you set it up that way.

if you need more detail, myself and others have posted this kind of
stuff a dozen times, and it's in manuals, the wiki and the faq.
-kdf

chiphart
2006-08-16, 09:05
MrSinatra wrote:
> well, he directed his "insult" at the slim server dev team, not people
> here, and it wasn't an insult, it was a complaint, lets not be so thin
> skinned.

Actually, a fair number of the folks who post here *are*
responsible for the code in one small place or another. Some
(kdf) are responsible for large parts.

Even people like myself, who haven't donated an ounce of code
but are inclined to help those in need, feel as though they are
part of the team.

> he was attacked, not the other way around.

The first insult was thrown by him by any reasonable definition.


Go back to your original response to this thread. You said that
folks were too hard on newbies. They, I, we are not. You can
see a dozen helpful efforts a day.

RUDE newbies are a different matter.

--
Chip Hart - Pediatric Solutions * Physician's Computer Company
chip @ pcc.com * 1 Main St. #7, Winooski, VT 05404
800-722-7708 * http://www.pcc.com/~chip
f.802-846-8178 * Pediatric Software Just Got Smarter.
Your Practice Just Got Healthier.

fingers
2006-08-16, 16:20
On 8/16/06, MrSinatra wrote:[color=blue]

If you want to rant, do it at your spouse or significant other.

Cheers
Geoff

Wow! Sounds like you must have a terrific relationship with your "spouse" or "significant other" ;)

For whatever it's worth, I have experienced scan issues with numerous versions of SS. Some worse than others. Presently, it indeed takes a long time to scan, but I typically do it in the evening when my "spouse" and I are cuddled up watching a movie. The thing that I don't like is that when scanning it can completely peg the CPU. My box is a 3.06GHZ proc, 1GB Ram and 2 250GB HDs. So, it amazes me that it does that.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-16, 18:19
The thing that I don't like is that when scanning it can completely peg the CPU. My box is a 3.06GHZ proc, 1GB Ram and 2 250GB HDs. So, it amazes me that it does that.
It's hard to make intelligent comments on this performance without more information.

How many tracks? What format are they in? What version of the server are you running?

For comparison, I have about 8500 tracks, all MP3, 1.8GHz processor, 512MB Ram. My library is about 80GB. Last time I did a full scan it took about 15 minutes I think.

So if I can still do arithmetic this late at night, that's about 550 tracks per minute. Put another way, that's 2ms/track. Seems pretty fast to me.

As I recall, and it has been a while since I did a full scan, it doesn't anywhere near peg the CPU. It's pretty I/O bound.

I'm running 6.2.2.

Your mileage may vary.

fingers
2006-08-16, 18:28
It's hard to make intelligent comments on this performance without more information.

How many tracks? What format are they in? What version of the server are you running?

For comparison, I have about 8500 tracks, all MP3, 1.8GHz processor, 512MB Ram. My library is about 80GB. Last time I did a full scan it took about 15 minutes I think.

So if I can still do arithmetic this late at night, that's about 550 tracks per minute. Put another way, that's 2ms/track. Seems pretty fast to me.

As I recall, and it has been a while since I did a full scan, it doesn't anywhere near peg the CPU. It's pretty I/O bound.

I'm running 6.2.2.

Your mileage may vary.

Here are the details:

I am running SlimServer 6.3.0 - 8148 - Windows XP - EN - cp1252.
My computer has a 3.06GHz processors, 1GB of Ram, and 2x250MB hard drives.
Hard Drive space remaining on drive containing music folder = 129MB
923 Albums / 11374 songs by 554 artists
File format: MP3 320KB

Michaelwagner
2006-08-16, 18:59
2x250MB hard drives.

I assume you mean GB?


923 Albums / 11374 songs by 554 artists
File format: MP3 320KB

I haven't tried 6.3 yet, but based on my experience (I also use 320KB MP3s) that should scan in less than half an hour.

How long does it take?

inv
2006-08-16, 19:11
Well, I had to check in on you guys.. ;)

Could somebody please tell me where I asked for help? My intention was to let whoever made the scan process know that it has the possibilty of freezing at 99% for hours and hours.

I might have gone out on a ledge when i said that my system was the perfect setup. This might not be the case, but the key issue here is (as Patrick dixon said) that the slimserver scan process should be able to gracefully recover from these errors (like itunes and mediaplayer library). A playlist that loops, so what? As i said before, I'm sure there is a pattern for solving similar problems. KDF mentioned that all the error information is located in the logs. Well, if this is true, the developer certainly knew about the error, and why didnt he just fix it?

Here are some other reasons why I thing the scan process might need some work:

First of all, any program running on a desktop computer (in the background) that consumes 99% cpu (slimserver does this when working properly too) for more than 10 minutes will have a severe risk of beeing killed by the user which is never a good thing. Chances are that slimserver will be put into an
inconsistent state. There are ways to tag a proc with a priority, giving other, more important procs the chance to breathe.

Second, simply by looking at the thread count of the slim.exe process (2 threads) I'm guessing that the developer has choose a brude force approach to indexing the data. Slim probably uses on thread to listen for request on port 9000, and the second to perform fetch/index op. The brude force theory is further confirmed by the fact that the whole process seems unneccecarily slow. i/o ops (database and fileread) vs preprocessing of the data could surely be done in parallell. (Of course, i might be wrong, in that a threadpool might be in use)

Last, but not least. Most operating systems today, and indeed indexers (google desktop, ms desktopsearch, spotlight, etc) , utilize Filesystemwatchers for realtime indexing. It is cheap and easy to implement (a couple of codelines in .net). This would certianly solve ModelCitizen's complains about indextime
for adding only one new playlist item.

And to mrSinatra, your response to the phrase "How much did you pay for the server software?", Originally Posted by pfarrell illustrated the point nicely.

PS: I'm currently running 6.5 (alpha, beta, gamma or whatever) now...seems to be working...so maybe the intern is all grown up now. :P

Michaelwagner
2006-08-16, 20:05
Sigh ...

Almost everything you told us, in flamebait and now more calmly, is already known.

You could have found this out yourself with a little light reading.

Slimserver is written in perl. Whether you are a perl fan or not, that's the language it's written in. Warts and all.

perl did not acquire threads until recently, and not all implementations for all machines work equally well, so the developers have stayed away from multi-threading until very recently. The entire slimserver has it's own internal dispatcher so that it can service music requests and display requests and handle remote control button presses while scanning and dishing out web pages at the web interface.

[edit] the two threads you see in windows - one is a perl windows implementation thread that does almost nothing - I think it waits for sigint or something. It is not a perl second thread. Slimserver is at the moment single threaded. In 6.5 they're getting their toe in the water with a second thread. We'll see how that goes.

It is true that (some) file systems have a way of notifying you about file updates, but the notification method is not uniform across file systems. Moreover, Slimserver has to work (and does, to a remarkable extent, it does succeed) across multiple systems and across networks. So the file store may be on a linux box, but slimserver may be running on windows. Or vice versa. The problem is complex in it's generality and not, as I understand it, handled at all well by perl. So the application would have to get down and dirty in system details, not a pleasant task.

There is code in slimserver, going back to the early days of release 6, to catch and detect most common scanning loops. These loops are more subtle than you might think, because some music file formats spread themselves across multiple files. For instance, one file format records the entire album as a monolith and then generates a second file called a cue sheet. The idea is to prevent gaps between tracks if you don't want them. But the 2 file format wasn't as well thought out as it might have been (by the designers of the format, not Slim) and it is possible to have various out-of-sync problems.

But, basically, what you described as happening shouldn't.

Which is why we asked to see your logs, to try to get to the bottom of what's happened, to improve the product so it won't happen again.

You wrote:

any program running on a desktop computer (in the background) that consumes 99% cpu (slimserver does this when working properly too)
No it doesn't.

If it's consuming 99% of the cpu, for long enough for you to casually notice, it's not running properly at all.

I run slimserver 24/7 and have done so for about a year now. It runs on my main computer that also runs AutoCAD Mechanical Desktop (when you look up pig in the dictionary, that's what you find). Slim may use the CPU for 10 seconds at a time, in response to a query, but that's it.

And when scanning, once in a blue moon, it is rather more busy for 15 minutes to half an hour or so, but even then you have plenty of computer left over, at least I do on my 1.8GHz machine.

So if that's not your experience, and if you actually want to get to the bottom of it rather than complaining and shouting-but-not-for-help in a very loud voice, turn on the debugging options and show us what your log shows.

Or not.

Your choice.

fingers
2006-08-16, 20:34
I assume you mean GB?



I haven't tried 6.3 yet, but based on my experience (I also use 320KB MP3s) that should scan in less than half an hour.

How long does it take?


Yup... GB

Sometimes a couple hours

fingers
2006-08-16, 20:44
Sigh ...

Almost everything you told us, in flamebait and now more calmly, is already known.

You could have found this out yourself with a little light reading.

Slimserver is written in perl. Whether you are a perl fan or not, that's the language it's written in. Warts and all.

perl did not acquire threads until recently, and not all implementations for all machines work equally well, so the developers have stayed away from multi-threading until very recently. The entire slimserver has it's own internal dispatcher so that it can service music requests and display requests and handle remote control button presses while scanning and dishing out web pages at the web interface.

[edit] the two threads you see in windows - one is a perl windows implementation thread that does almost nothing - I think it waits for sigint or something. It is not a perl second thread. Slimserver is at the moment single threaded. In 6.5 they're getting their toe in the water with a second thread. We'll see how that goes.

It is true that (some) file systems have a way of notifying you about file updates, but the notification method is not uniform across file systems. Moreover, Slimserver has to work (and does, to a remarkable extent, it does succeed) across multiple systems and across networks. So the file store may be on a linux box, but slimserver may be running on windows. Or vice versa. The problem is complex in it's generality and not, as I understand it, handled at all well by perl. So the application would have to get down and dirty in system details, not a pleasant task.

There is code in slimserver, going back to the early days of release 6, to catch and detect most common scanning loops. These loops are more subtle than you might think, because some music file formats spread themselves across multiple files. For instance, one file format records the entire album as a monolith and then generates a second file called a cue sheet. The idea is to prevent gaps between tracks if you don't want them. But the 2 file format wasn't as well thought out as it might have been (by the designers of the format, not Slim) and it is possible to have various out-of-sync problems.

But, basically, what you described as happening shouldn't.

Which is why we asked to see your logs, to try to get to the bottom of what's happened, to improve the product so it won't happen again.

You wrote:

No it doesn't.

If it's consuming 99% of the cpu, for long enough for you to casually notice, it's not running properly at all.

I run slimserver 24/7 and have done so for about a year now. It runs on my main computer that also runs AutoCAD Mechanical Desktop (when you look up pig in the dictionary, that's what you find). Slim may use the CPU for 10 seconds at a time, in response to a query, but that's it.

And when scanning, once in a blue moon, it is rather more busy for 15 minutes to half an hour or so, but even then you have plenty of computer left over, at least I do on my 1.8GHz machine.

So if that's not your experience, and if you actually want to get to the bottom of it rather than complaining and shouting-but-not-for-help in a very loud voice, turn on the debugging options and show us what your log shows.

Or not.

Your choice.

actually.... yes it does! I run SlimServer on multiple machines. All the machines are a minimum of 2.8GHz up to 3.06GHz. All my machines have 1GB of RAM and large hard drives with more than enough space remaining on each drive. Everyone of my machines not only pegs the CPU when scanning. But also comes close just during normal operation, even when Slim.exe is idle. All of my machines are running the latest version of Windows XP Pro with all the latest patches. All machines are running SlimServer 6.3.0 - 8148

Michaelwagner
2006-08-16, 20:50
Well, I decided to rescan my library.

So far it's running about 80% CPU (on a machine half the speed of yours, and half the memory).

I have 100MB of free physical RAM while the scan is running.

OK. It just finished. 15 minutes for 8752 songs by 2264 artists.

During that time, I checked my email, browsed web sites, etc.

That's how it's supposed to work.

Michael

Michaelwagner
2006-08-16, 21:11
I run SlimServer on multiple machines. All the machines are a minimum of 2.8GHz up to 3.06GHz. All my machines have 1GB of RAM and large hard drives with more than enough space remaining on each drive. Everyone of my machines not only pegs the CPU when scanning. But also comes close just during normal operation, even when Slim.exe is idle. All of my machines are running the latest version of Windows XP Pro with all the latest patches. All machines are running SlimServer 6.3.0 - 8148
Well, that's definitely not normal.

I don't run XP on my "normal" machine, but I have run Slimserver on an XP pro laptop, and it was fine. So let's put XP aside for a second.

What jumps out at me after that is running multiple Slimservers. Might I ask why? I have done it, just not very often. It didn't effect me in any adverse way, but ...

You say you can peg the CPU even when Slim is idle. So if slim is idle, who's pegging the CPU?

Can you run task manager and tell us who's getting the CPU?

How much free physical memory do you have? Easiest way to get a quick read on that is go to the task manager, select the performance tab, read off the 3 numbers for physical memory.

tommypeters
2006-08-16, 22:49
When SlimServer is idle, it uses 0% and once every 10 seconds or so 2%, on an otherwise idle machine. When scanning, and nothing else is happening on the machine, why shouldn't slim.exe use close to 100% of the CPU cycles? Why waste them on the System Idle Process? This is of course regardless of CPU speed, it's not so that the Slimserver runs at 1.5GHz and if you have a faster CPU you get a lot of unused clock cycles...

If I do something else during scanning, slim.exe gets - and uses - a lower percentage of the CPU cycles. IF I want it to get less, I can lower the priority of the process in Task Manager. The process is also most of the time (while scanning) "pumping", changing in intervals of maybe 10-20 seconds between two levels of CPU usage.

geoffb
2006-08-17, 06:10
On 8/16/06, fingers wrote:
>
> actually.... yes it does! I run SlimServer on multiple machines. All
> the machines are a minimum of 2.8GHz up to 3.06GHz. All my machines
> have 1GB of RAM and large hard drives with more than enough space
> remaining on each drive. Everyone of my machines not only pegs the CPU
> when scanning. But also comes close just during normal operation, even
> when Slim.exe is idle. All of my machines are running the latest
> version of Windows XP Pro with all the latest patches. All machines are
> running SlimServer 6.3.0 - 8148

You might want to consider diving into the 6.5 builds. I did this the
other day, and was pleasantly surprised - scanning went off and did
it's thing in it's own thread, the CPU didn't top out, and everything
went smoothly. I didn't time anything (I will do if anyone wants it),
but the *experience* was good - better than with 6.3.1. Which is the
point, right?
I also added a few albums last night, making sure that the modified
dates were the current time, then told SS to scan for new/modified
music. Again, it was non-intrusive, took around 3 minutes, and that
was sorting through a library of 1200 albums. My machine is 2.3GHz
1GB, with XP Pro.

If you do go that way, of course make sure you have a way back :)

Cheers
Geoff

fingers
2006-08-17, 06:17
Well, that's definitely not normal.

I don't run XP on my "normal" machine, but I have run Slimserver on an XP pro laptop, and it was fine. So let's put XP aside for a second.

What jumps out at me after that is running multiple Slimservers. Might I ask why? I have done it, just not very often. It didn't effect me in any adverse way, but ...

You say you can peg the CPU even when Slim is idle. So if slim is idle, who's pegging the CPU?

Can you run task manager and tell us who's getting the CPU?

How much free physical memory do you have? Easiest way to get a quick read on that is go to the task manager, select the performance tab, read off the 3 numbers for physical memory.

- "Might I ask why?": I have 4 devices. 2 run off one of my machines at home. 2 others run off 2 other machines in different locations at the office.
- Slim.exe is pegging the CPU per Task Manager.
- Task Manager says that Slim.exe is using about 90% of the memory when scanning.

aubuti
2006-08-17, 06:23
Well, I had to check in on you guys.. ;)

Could somebody please tell me where I asked for help? My intention was to let whoever made the scan process know that it has the possibilty of freezing at 99% for hours and hours.
So sorry, our mistake. In that case, follow the instructions on the tech support link on the SD home page, namely: "Feel free to contact our support staff at support@slimdevices.com with your questions or comments." (In contrast, the forums are described on that page as "The Slim Devices community has several forums where customers help each other out.")

And of course, searching/filing a bug at http://bugs.slimdevices.com is also a normal way to go about informing the developers about the problems you're experiencing.

tommypeters
2006-08-17, 07:59
...or go to a shrink.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-17, 21:23
- "Might I ask why?": I have 4 devices. 2 run off one of my machines at home. 2 others run off 2 other machines in different locations at the office.

Ah, so they aren't all running on the same network. I misunderstood.



- Slim.exe is pegging the CPU per Task Manager.
- Task Manager says that Slim.exe is using about 90% of the memory when scanning.

These might be related. It sounds like there's a memory problem. IIRC you have a gig of memory. There's no way it should be using much more than a 100MB of memory. If it's using 900MB of memory, it's probably sending the system into paging and thrashing.

It would be really nice to see your logs.

Taito
2006-08-21, 08:32
Hi guys, I'm still using 6.2.2, and I'll admit that I've had a few run-ins with the library scan. It wasn't consistently scanning. I discovered that (in my case), to guarantee that the scan will work I need to not be connected to my squeezebox. Having discovered that, I now don't have any problems.

I'm running a Centrino 2GHz laptop with 1GB of RAM.

Scanning my library of 3500 FLAC files on an external 200GB HDD uses (varies) any where between 45 and 61% of CPU time. Scans take approximately 5 minutes. I run many (too many) processes and at worst have about 500MB of free RAM while Slimserver is running.

I make no claims about understanding why people are having problems, but imagine that the scan performance that I am achieving is closer to what it should be.

Maybe I've been lucky...

Cheers, Ben

MrSinatra
2006-08-22, 12:12
I thought the first post *was* offensive.


Mike, i respect your posts and opinion, but seriously, you're offended by what he said in the first post?

if this:


I suggest that the Slimserver dev team give this job to someone other than the summer intern.

offends your sensibilities, then i think its fair to say they are delicate indeed. i wonder how you can channel surf or get thru a day at the office, when such meaningless nothings set off your tripwire. and i see its not just you, there are a lot of people here, who take such light remarks as blasphemy, and yell sacriledge and do all they can to cast out the heretics, whose only crime, that i can see, is offending the delicate sensibilities of the group.

again, i have no beef with you, but just as you have your opinion of it, thats mine.


On 8/16/06, MrSinatra wrote:
>
> Michaelwagner Wrote:
> > That's factually incorrect. He wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > after saying that the quality of the code was such that it had to have
> > been written by an intern. I think the implication is clear.
>
> no, its not "factually" incorrect. his first post starting the thread
> was the one he got jumped on for. you are refering to a later post *
> after * he was attacked.

Read it again, sam. The original post said:
>I suggest that the Slimserver dev team give this job to
>someone other than the summer intern.

Whether this kind of statement is appropriate is irrelevant.

apparently its not irrelevant since this guy is getting lynched.

and yeah, the ORIGINAL POST says that... thats what i was saying, he got attacked after his first post, not for the line mike wagner was citing.

but anyway, go on...


If you own a car, and you have problems with it, you either ask, or
rant at, the manufacturer - and they fix it either way.
If you instead show up at an enthusiast meeting,

this is a message board run by the COMPANY, not by enthusiasts. the employees do actually post, and want feedback. there is no problem with him directing his comments here.


complain loudly about
how bad the car is, how shoddily it's made, oh, and by the way, I have
a problem with my carb, could someone help me? - don't be surprised if
you not only don't get any help, but get criticised for your
behaviour.

so you're comparing his original post which is LEGITIMATE in what it is complaining about btw, to taking over a public meeting, being loud, having an issue that might be your own making, etc... they are in no way similar! if you don't like the post, don't respond! whats so hard about that?

i really just can't believe what he said would upset ANYONE this much. i eman, i reread it looking for the part that got everyone so upset, and it just isn't there. its not even directed at anyone but the people who developed the product that is NOT always working properly.


If you want to rant, do it at your spouse or significant other.
If you want to get help, ask here, and be prepared to dig a bit.
If you want to rant AND get help, do it at the paid support people
(but please, spare them the rant if you can - they're human too).

This is an *enthusiast* group. Help is given in the spirit that it's asked for.

thats your opinion, one i don't share. i think its wrong of you guys to act like this... its a lynching.


if you need more detail, myself and others have posted this kind of
stuff a dozen times, and it's in manuals, the wiki and the faq.
-kdf

thats right on, and what i figured, which is why i said "dumb questions." i just figured since you teased it, might as well address it. thx btw.


MrSinatra wrote:
> well, he directed his "insult" at the slim server dev team, not people
> here, and it wasn't an insult, it was a complaint, lets not be so thin
> skinned.

Actually, a fair number of the folks who post here *are*
responsible for the code in one small place or another. Some
(kdf) are responsible for large parts.


two points:

1. what he said was not insulting, offensive, or a big deal. it just wasn't. seriously chip, do you feel he drew blood? do you feel personally attacked? have you been harmed?

2. to then redefine the "dev team" as anyone who ever said anything to slim, would make the dev team huge, and even include me! sure, i've given some slight feedback, but i'm not part of the dev team. but even if i go along with your definition, CLEARLY that was not the definition INTENDED by the OP. he was aiming it right at the SD company, so lets not now redefine his intent, just so we can justify our outrage, ok?


Even people like myself, who haven't donated an ounce of code
but are inclined to help those in need, feel as though they are
part of the team.

> he was attacked, not the other way around.

The first insult was thrown by him by any reasonable definition.

if you guys REALLY truly believe that was an insult meant to besmirch the character of people, rather than just a complaint directed at a company during legitimate frustration, one which i might add again IS LEGITIMATE regarding its topic of deficiency, then i am perplexed and amazed and stupified.

must all criticsm be sterile and neutered? do we take even the slightest of slights as unacceptable rallying cries to flame war?

COME ON, get a thicker skin! imo, it is unreasonable to react this way.


Go back to your original response to this thread. You said that
folks were too hard on newbies. They, I, we are not. You can
see a dozen helpful efforts a day.

RUDE newbies are a different matter.


allow me to clarify: too hard on newbies who offend the delicate sensibilities around here. too hard on newbies who dare to complain in a way the high priests find unacceptable.

the height of over-reaction is best illustrated here:


...or go to a shrink.

so, the OP is so egregious is he, that it should be suggested either seriously, or jokingly but with a hint of seriousness, (as the intent is not clear), that he should see a shrink?

is this lost on everyone? am i reaching anyone?

i'm sure some of you are wondering why i'd bother to post such a long message and rehash all this...

well, i'm frankly tired of seeing it happen. if the elders want respect, they have to give it as well. i for one will not genuflect if i have a problem, and likewise, i'll try to keep the hysterics on my part down.

i just wish those with delicate sensibilities would have more reasonable expectations of others, especially newbies, who aren't going to realize immediately what your expectations are. if all were just a tad more restrained, perhaps we could grow this little gathering place, and not scare off guys like Inv, who might post his logs, if he were encouraged instead of brow beaten.

and for the record, i have had similar issues that are not the fault of my hardware, or playlists, as i have none. just well made EAC mp3s. SS DOES act poorly on occassion, and to say so, and make a jab about did an intern write the code for which i have a problem, is NOT a capital offense, or an offense at all.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-22, 13:37
Mike, i respect your posts and opinion, but seriously, you're offended by what he said in the first post?
Had it been my code, yes, I would have found it offensive.

Since it isn't my code, I didn't personally react to it, no.

And, BTW, I did find the "shrink" comment out of line, IMHO.

kdf
2006-08-22, 13:48
I'm having a hard time trying to figure out exactly who is really overreacting here. I suppose the trolls are now well-fed, and still happy enough to not bother with sending any logs.

consider this issue closed.
-kdf

Michaelwagner
2006-08-22, 14:23
Agreed. ...

MrSinatra
2006-08-22, 16:16
just wanted to add i did a clear and rescan twice today... the first time it hung for no apparent reason, the second time it didn't.

i don't have any debug stuff enabled so i can't post a log... but since this isn't that important to me, i don't feel the need to bother, altho i will if anyone really wants me to. just starting it again is a decent workaround for me. (altho this time i had to fully quit and restart SS to make that work)

it normally only happens once every ten times or so, (not counting overnights when it just scans for new or changed, where it seemingly doesn't have any issues)

and btw, since i have HyperThreading on my system, when it does it, it never goes past 50-51%... but thats 100% of that "side" of my processor. and it stays up that high with just brief drops as it stalls.

and mike, thx for seeing my pov. -mdw

Marc Sherman
2006-08-23, 05:10
MrSinatra wrote:
> just wanted to add i did a clear and rescan twice today... the first
> time it hung for no apparent reason, the second time it didn't.
>
> i don't have any debug stuff enabled so i can't post a log... but
> since this isn't that important to me, i don't feel the need to bother,
> altho i will if anyone really wants me to. just starting it again is a
> decent workaround for me. (altho this time i had to fully quit and
> restart SS to make that work)

If you're not willing to post logs and help out when you have the
ability, you kind of lose the moral authority to complain about other
bugs in the software, don't you?

- Marc

Michaelwagner
2006-08-23, 05:25
OK, how about we all take a big step back and a deep breath.

No one is talking moral authority, he's not the OP, he basically said it doesn't bother him enough to go to the trouble of collecting and posting logs.

That's a valid thing to say and do, surely.

If your toaster burns the toast once every 10 times and you don't care, maybe you don't have to debug the toaster.

MrSinatra
2006-08-23, 10:42
thx Mike, perfect summation of my thoughts exactly.

and i will reiterate what was seemingly tho incomprehensibly missed, (paraphrasing):

"i will enable the debug and post the logs, IF anyone really wants me to."

part of the reason i'm not too concerned, is that i gather 6.5 is nearly done, and it does a lot of things better tho differently than 6.3, so i'm simply trying to be patient.

when 6.5 comes out, and i've had it long enough to see how it all works, thats when i'll be more likely to be less patient and more pro-active / vocal about the things that i find deficient.

dborn
2006-08-26, 07:34
For what it's worth, here are my rescanning numbers:

Slimserver is V6.2.2 Linux. All my music is MP3 with "proper" tags (no embedded artwork though), there's more or less 80% of my collection that has album artwork contained in a single cover.jpg file per directory.

17666 songs, 1311 albums, 656 artists, 9 playlists (!)
For a full rescan, it took exactly 2 hours and 45 minutes and that's running on an Linkstation HG300! with 128MB or RAM and a 266MHz RISC processor!

The scanning process is taking 1.78 seconds per file and that's WITH the d_scan debugs turned on! This is running on a computer the size (and power) of a toaster! ;-)

I can only imagine it would be much faster on any half-decent desktop computer...

Anyway, my $0.02...
Daniel

saurus
2006-08-27, 07:14
this is without a doubt, the most intellectually bankrupt reply one can have to someone who has a problem.

tell me, if i buy a new car, and they give me free this and that, and those things break, am i not in the right to go back to the dealer and complain just b/c they were given to me freely?

This is a community forum. This is not the vendor support page. Here are a lot of guys that are not paid b Slim Devices. So nobody can expect to get support cause he paid for a Slim Device item.

And please note also that the Slimserver is a free community project. If you need something within Slimserver and regard this as something you bought by Slim Devices you should direct this claim direct to Slim Devices.


hell, in this case, using SS isn't even optional, b/c nothing else powers the hardware.

Please answer yourself the question from whom you bought the SB device. I'm sure the answer is not "Slimserver Community".


Inv, not everyone thinks you're wrong. i can see where the elders here could get tired of complaints or repeated questions, but i don't see why you should be ganged up on b/c of it.


First as I stated above it's not the vendor support team. But also if you are calling the vendor support, it's very helpful to flame around. Trust me, I worked years for a big linux distributon support as team leader and also answered complaints. There is no support without your own help. And if you are not willing to, also professional support cannot help. So all in all, such guys are sorted out as "I just want to express my frustration and will never end this process".


and btw, occassionally the scan process kills my system too, seemingly for no reason. i simply start it over again. i also set it to scan every night, but often a manual clear and rescan is required. hopefully in ver 6.5 a lot of these issues will be much better off.

Just to tell the reading audience: I ran Slimserver 6.3.1 on an SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9, AMD K6-2 350 CPU, 384MB RAM. And I'm fine with the time it takes for this machine to scan a libary with about 10'000 files.

Ciao, Torsten

jncraig
2006-08-27, 07:45
> And please note also that the Slimserver is a free community project.

Not quite.

"Slim Devices introduces SlimServer 6.3.1, our powerful and free Open
Source software."



--


Joe

saurus
2006-08-27, 08:05
> And please note also that the Slimserver is a free community project.

Not quite.

But many guys that are not paid by Slim Devices contributed a large portion of code. But you're right - slimserver is open source but not community only.

Ciao, Torsten

Michaelwagner
2006-08-27, 08:13
Oh, guys, give it a rest already.

There is excellent support, from Slim Devices, for their box and their software. If you have a problem with Slimserver, you can take it there.

This forum is not for problem solving. It's for enthusiasts to trade other more esoteric information. We can also occasionally help out with problems, but we're not well equipped, don't have the database and whatever other tools the support staff have, and most importantly, we're not paid to be problem solvers.

While it's true that a few of the Slim staff, including the CEO, browse these forums, almost none of the support staff do.

Reporting a problem here is not reporting it to Slim support. And it has a considerably lower chance of getting fixed here than with the proper support channels.

The original poster has already made it clear he wasn't asking for help. So, for the purposes of this forum, his posting was noise, not signal.

The fact is, you pay for the hardware.

The software, which you need to buy the hardware, you can install totally before you buy the hardware, try it out using Softsqueeze or winamp or both, see if you like (or don't) the software. Since it's free, you can download it ahead of time, try it and make up your own mind if it works for you or not.

Then you can buy the hardware (or not). Which is all you actually paid money for.

How about we let this drop now?

It's a totally pointless waste of time to debate whether we should be polite to someone that is not looking for help by venting in the wrong place. Regardless of who thinks they paid what for Slimserver, they didn't pay it to any of us.

MrSinatra
2006-08-27, 15:18
sorry mike, i was content to let it go, but this post is just too much...


This is a community forum. This is not the vendor support page. Here are a lot of guys that are not paid b Slim Devices. So nobody can expect to get support cause he paid for a Slim Device item.

And please note also that the Slimserver is a free community project. If you need something within Slimserver and regard this as something you bought by Slim Devices you should direct this claim direct to Slim Devices.



Please answer yourself the question from whom you bought the SB device. I'm sure the answer is not "Slimserver Community".



First as I stated above it's not the vendor support team. But also if you are calling the vendor support, it's very helpful to flame around. Trust me, I worked years for a big linux distributon support as team leader and also answered complaints. There is no support without your own help. And if you are not willing to, also professional support cannot help. So all in all, such guys are sorted out as "I just want to express my frustration and will never end this process".



Just to tell the reading audience: I ran Slimserver 6.3.1 on an SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9, AMD K6-2 350 CPU, 384MB RAM. And I'm fine with the time it takes for this machine to scan a libary with about 10'000 files.

Ciao, Torsten

Ciao,

the problem with your argument is:

1. Slim HOSTS the website the forum is, and reads the forum, and posts to it.

2. The OP directed his comments to the people at slim specifically, but obviously wanted others to see them, for reasons which are his own, but not by necessity illegitimate.

3. he is totally free to post his comments, regardless of whatever they may be, to anyone he wants... he doesn't have to fulfill your expectations as to what is "allowed" content and what is not.

4. just to put a FINE point on what i am saying:

no one, repeat, NO ONE would buy the hardware, if it didn't have software to make it work.

are you with me so far???

so when someone has a complaint about SS, its a stupid cop out to say the complaint should be ignored b/c SS itself is free.

this isn't a hard idea to grasp. and i say anyone who can't see that is willfully blind.

auf Wiedersehen, adieu, adois, happy trails, and cya later alligator.

Michaelwagner
2006-08-27, 16:10
the problem with your argument is:

1. Slim HOSTS the website the forum is, and reads the forum, and posts to it.

Sorry, I don't see the relevance of this.

I used to own an audiotron. Voyetra, the people who made the audiotron, ran a forum for enthusiasts. Here you go, here's some disk space and a forum to talk amongst yourselfs. It was very clear, as it is very clear here, that this is not the official support channel.

Some Slim people, the wrong people, as I pointed out, not the support staff, read the forums.

It's still fundamentally the wrong place to find support.


2. The OP directed his comments to the people at slim specifically, but obviously wanted others to see them, for reasons which are his own, but not by necessity illegitimate.

He also provided a diagnosis, and a slur. As I will explain later, his diagnosis was incorrect and his slur uncalled for.


3. he is totally free to post his comments, regardless of whatever they may be, to anyone he wants... he doesn't have to fulfill your expectations as to what is "allowed" content and what is not.

I see. So the OP, by virtue of being OP, is allowed to say anything, and the people in this forum, who have helped hundreds, perhaps thousands of friendly people here, are not allowed to object to trolls?

How come he's allowed to say anything he wants and we aren't? How come KDF doesn't get the same freedom to say what's on his mind as the OP did? Doesn't this seem just a teeny tiny bit hypocritical to you?


4. just to put a FINE point on what i am saying:

no one, repeat, NO ONE would buy the hardware, if it didn't have software to make it work.
are you with me so far???

Yes. But you've got the wrong fine point, and you're not yet with the program.

Slimserver is available for download before you buy. You can try it all out, all of it, including a Squeezebox emulator, before you buy. If you don't like the scan time, if you find it all that onerous (15 minutes on my system is not onerous, but the OP had a different experience), you could make that choice and not buy. It's the ultimate kick the tires before you buy policy.

After that, there's a 30 day money back no questions asked policy.

After that, in fact, Slim has been very generous whenever I've had a problem, in a number of cases long after the 30 days were up.

After that, the experience of the OP was atypical. Vastly atypical, as my several postings about performance pointed out. So we asked him to see what was different about his system, to post logs, so we could figure it out. I have some experience poking around in the scanning section, and so do quite a few others here, so we might have been able to steer him in the right direction towards a solution.


so when someone has a complaint about SS, its a stupid cop out to say the complaint should be ignored b/c SS itself is free.

I never said the complaint should be ignored. Neiter, as I recall, did KDF. In fact, KDF asked 3 times to see the logs. If we can't see the diagnostic information, the complaint pretty much HAS to be ignored, because there's no information to go on.



i say anyone who can't see that is willfully blind.

My point exactly. Where in the whole wide world can you find someone who can fix software by telepathy? Just whine at me for a while, insult me and call me an intern, and from the sound of your voice I can tell you that you entered the wrong directory name for the music folder.

It ain't gonna happen.

Now, about the scanning.

My background is in performance measurement and analysis. Something like 6 to 9 months ago, I did some measurements of the scanning code. Dan had done some different measurements, from a different perspective (I think he did his first, but I didn't find out about them until I produced my results). I had also written some code, in a different language, but still an interpreted one, to do much the same job. My code was more than half an order of magnitude faster.

So I measured the scanning code. The part of the scanner that reads the MP3s (I only looked at the MP3 case) is only about 20% of the work. The rest of the time is taken up in the database code.

The database is another open source package, written by some other people. It's a simple minded database package, easy to use, but confined to a single user at a time, and it doesn't scale well to larger datasets.

So it's not really Slims code that is taking the time. At least for 6.2, the bottleneck is the database.

So the major improvements being worked on and prepared for 6.5 this fall are:

to move to a separate thread for scanning, so that long scan delays won't effect music quality or cause interruptions,

to move to a more sophisticated database that doesn't die when presented with large amounts of data.

Also, the scanning thread becomes, to the database, a separate user, so it had to be a multi-user database.

Despite all that, 8,000 to 10,000 tracks should take about 15 minutes on modern hardware. The fact that it took an order of magnitude longer means that something else was going very badly wrong. I would have wanted to see the scan and store timestamps, to see where the time was going, and then to see if either the database was somehow accidentally detuned, or if there was some problem with the file structure of the music folder.

But the OP said, essentially, he wasn't asking for help.

So what was he hoping for, other than upsetting people?

People who post only to get a reaction out of others, not to actually solve anything, are called trolls.

After a while you learn not to feed the trolls.

I hope I'm allowed to have my opinion of the OP as a troll, as much as he has his opinion that it's the Slim scanning code that an intern wrote that caused his problem he doesn't want help with, just wants to complain about.

MrSinatra
2006-08-27, 16:43
Sorry, I don't see the relevance of this.

I used to own an audiotron. Voyetra, the people who made the audiotron, ran a forum for enthusiasts. Here you go, here's some disk space and a forum to talk amongst yourselfs. It was very clear, as it is very clear here, that this is not the official support channel.

Some Slim people, the wrong people, as I pointed out, not the support staff, read the forums.

It's still fundamentally the wrong place to find support.

not the point mike... (just to be clear btw, my last post was directed at the swiss located guy) but since you responded, i'll respond to you.

anyway, u said yourself he wasn't asking for help. he is free to come here as far as i'm concerned, and say what he said, and i don't see why anyone would be upset by what he said. thin skins.

besides which, it doesn't matter WHO hosts the site as far as i'm concerned, he made a public comment for public consumption. had it been said on a forum 100% free of official slim involvement, or had it been (as it was) said on a site 100% OWNED AND OPERATED by slim, it doesn't matter. i wasn't the one saying it mattered, i was addressing those who said it did. as if "enthusiast site" means "no complainst allowed." and they tried to back up that ridiculous assertion by saying it wasn't slims site, which is patently false. it is not the official support channel, but so what?

had he wanted to direct it there, he would have, and if not, he was free to do so here.


He also provided a diagnosis, and a slur. As I will explain later, his diagnosis was incorrect and his slur uncalled for.

the slur was mild and again, people around here need a thicker skin. as to his diagnosis, surely you believe he had an issue, do you not? i've had the same thing, and we're not alone.


I see. So the OP, by virtue of being OP, is allowed to say anything, and the people in this forum, who have helped hundreds, perhaps thousands of friendly people here, are not allowed to object to trolls?

so b/c the guy says something you don't like, he's a troll?

do you not see the myopic POV you have? to say you're judgmental is putting it lightly.


How come he's allowed to say anything he wants and we aren't? How come KDF doesn't get the same freedom to say what's on his mind as the OP did? Doesn't this seem just a teeny tiny bit hypocritical to you?

OF COURSE you are free to say anything in response, and clearly many of you have... and all i am saying is you guys went overboard, over a NOTHING small little thing, which if it were the only time, i wouldn't care, but it happens a lot... no one may dare blaspheme in the high temple! come on.


Yes. But you've got the wrong fine point, and you're not yet with the program.

Slimserver is available for download before you buy. You can try it all out, all of it, including a Squeezebox emulator, before you buy. If you don't like the scan time, if you find it all that onerous (15 minutes on my system is not onerous, but the OP had a different experience), you could make that choice and not buy. It's the ultimate kick the tires before you buy policy.

After that, there's a 30 day money back no questions asked policy.

After that, in fact, Slim has been very generous whenever I've had a problem, in a number of cases long after the 30 days were up.

so let me get this straight, b/c i want to hear you say this:

my options are either:

1. love it all and shut the hell up

or

2. return it regardless of what the problem is, however large or small

b/c thats what your thesis leads to.

personally, i think if i buy a car, and something is wrong with it, its ok to want the dealer to fix the problem, instead of totally returning the car. but hey, thats just me.


After that, the experience of the OP was atypical. Vastly atypical, as my several postings about performance pointed out. So we asked him to see what was different about his system, to post logs, so we could figure it out. I have some experience poking around in the scanning section, and so do quite a few others here, so we might have been able to steer him in the right direction towards a solution.

i've said it b4 mike, i respect you guys and what you do, its kind that you bother. but there is definitely a "fan boy" quality in here that is way too sensitive over the SMALLEST things.


I never said the complaint should be ignored. Neiter, as I recall, did KDF. In fact, KDF asked 3 times to see the logs. If we can't see the diagnostic information, the complaint pretty much HAS to be ignored, because there's no information to go on.

at this point i was speaking more generally, there definitely is this notion in here that complaints aren't welcome, period. in other words, just b/c the software is free, doesn't mean no one should ever lodge a complaint.


My point exactly. Where in the whole wide world can you find someone who can fix software by telepathy? Just whine at me for a while, insult me and call me an intern, and from the sound of your voice I can tell you that you entered the wrong directory name for the music folder.

It ain't gonna happen.

once again, as you said, he wasn't asking for help.

and btw, he wasn't calling anyone but whoever was responsible at slim an intern, and thats probably the most tame "insult" (a word too big for what it was) i can think of.


Now, about the scanning.

My background is in performance measurement and analysis. Something like 6 to 9 months ago, I did some measurements of the scanning code. Dan had done some different measurements, from a different perspective (I think he did his first, but I didn't find out about them until I produced my results). I had also written some code, in a different language, but still an interpreted one, to do much the same job. My code was more than half an order of magnitude faster.

So I measured the scanning code. The part of the scanner that reads the MP3s (I only looked at the MP3 case) is only about 20% of the work. The rest of the time is taken up in the database code.

The database is another open source package, written by some other people. It's a simple minded database package, easy to use, but confined to a single user at a time, and it doesn't scale well to larger datasets.

So it's not really Slims code that is taking the time. At least for 6.2, the bottleneck is the database.

So the major improvements being worked on and prepared for 6.5 this fall are:

to move to a separate thread for scanning, so that long scan delays won't effect music quality or cause interruptions,

to move to a more sophisticated database that doesn't die when presented with large amounts of data.

Also, the scanning thread becomes, to the database, a separate user, so it had to be a multi-user database.

Despite all that, 8,000 to 10,000 tracks should take about 15 minutes on modern hardware. The fact that it took an order of magnitude longer means that something else was going very badly wrong. I would have wanted to see the scan and store timestamps, to see where the time was going, and then to see if either the database was somehow accidentally detuned, or if there was some problem with the file structure of the music folder.

much respect for what you know and do. as i've said b4, i'm waiting for 6.5 to see how it is, b4 i press the subject further.


But the OP said, essentially, he wasn't asking for help.

So what was he hoping for, other than upsetting people?

if i had to guess, he was hoping slim would see it, since this site is part of the official slim website. he was probably also hoping for some empathy, and as we know, that was in vain.

the point to me is, he didn't do anything wrong, from my perspective, certainly nothing that he deserved ganged up for, and certainly nothing that he should see a shrink for... (which i know you totally agree with me on).

again, i have no beef with you, but you can't sell a car, say the engine is free, and then roll your eyes, wave your hands up in the air, and say "no mas" if the customer comes back with an engine problem. (complaint or support) jmho mike, -mdw

Michaelwagner
2006-08-27, 17:06
I think, Mr. Sinatra, that you're missing an important point.

He didn't take the car back to the dealer.

We told him several times to call support at slim.

He came (in your analogy) to a car club or a swap meet, a group of enthusiasts anyways, and complained. We thought he was looking for help, tried to help, now we're here.

As for the idea that "this is an enthusiast site, no complaints allowed", have you actually been reading other threads? There are dozens of complaints daily, some turn into support like threads, some turn into grumbling, etc.

But to come in swinging, saying "the clown who wrote this should go back to school", well, it's uncalled for and I find it disrespectful.

I don't have thin skin. As I've said before, he didn't bother me at all, but he did bother some other people. Maybe they were having a bad day. Maybe they took it more personally. Whatever. There does seem to be a double standard, that he can jump all over people but expects nothing to happen in response.

Newtons' law ... every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

I don't think we're a bunch of cheerleaders here ... there are things I wish Dan, Sean and Dean had done differently. And I've told them so, sometimes in open forum, sometimes in private email.

But it wouldn't occur to me to call them interns (or other names) because I have too much respect for the documented body of work they've done.

In the end, I think that's the issue. They may have made a mistake in coding, they may have made a mistake in design, but
that doesn't make them amateurs or interns or clowns.

Except on April 1st.

I have a lot of respect for what Slim has done, for doing the sort of quality of work I would have done if it had been my company and my time. They do good work. The slim client, the server, the trade-offs, etc.

Some of the tradeoffs I would have done in a slightly different place, some things I would have chosen to do somewhat differently, but basically they've been transparent and clear about their direction, much more than most technology companies I've dealt with.

Try to get the sort of co-operation we get daily from Slim out of Voyetra, or Microsoft, or Creative or any of these guys. Hasn't happened to me ever.

So I think we need to have a little more respect for Slim in this forum.

And for each other.

MrSinatra
2006-08-27, 17:10
Mike,

thats kool and the gang. i respect your opinion, i know you respect mine, (even tho we may disagree) but i'm more than content to leave it lay here, then to reiterate my feelings.

thx, -mdw