PDA

View Full Version : 6.5: why does DateTime now have its own format settings?



Mark Lanctot
2006-09-30, 13:48
I'm wondering why DateTime's format can now be set differently than default?

Does default also control how dates are displayed in the web pages, for example showing when a music file was created? If so I can understand why someone might want the formatting to be different. Otherwise I don't know why there's a different setting.

JJZolx
2006-09-30, 17:55
I'm wondering why DateTime's format can now be set differently than default?

Does default also control how dates are displayed in the web pages, for example showing when a music file was created? If so I can understand why someone might want the formatting to be different. Otherwise I don't know why there's a different setting.
I think that's the reason. Added flexibility. Which I like, even if it means additional server and player settings.

stinkingpig
2006-10-03, 12:21
On 10/3/06, Mark Lanctot <
Mark.Lanctot.2f489n1159901701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
>
> Did my first rescan after the initial one - 3 minutes 32 seconds for 301
> albums, 3026 songs, 461 artists.
>
> Not bad at all.
>
> The processor usage pattern is different with the split scanner. It
> used to take 30-40% processor with heavy disc access for the initial
> 75% of the scan, then 50-60% processor with light disc access for the
> remaining 25% of the scan. Now the final portion of the scan only
> takes about 20-30% processor.
>
>
>
I find that wipe-and-rescan is still necessary far too often (effectively
just about every time I add music). The regular scan detects new music
properly, but does not handle changes to existing music well at all.

--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

shabbs
2006-10-03, 12:29
I find that wipe-and-rescan is still necessary far too often (effectively
just about every time I add music). The regular scan detects new music
properly, but does not handle changes to existing music well at all.
Does your tag editor preserve the file date/time stamp when you make adjustments? That may be the case as the scan keys off the last modified date IIRC.

Cheers.

stinkingpig
2006-10-03, 13:05
On 10/3/06, shabbs <shabbs.2f49vz1159903801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Jack Coates;142552 Wrote:
> > I find that wipe-and-rescan is still necessary far too often
> > (effectively
> > just about every time I add music). The regular scan detects new music
> > properly, but does not handle changes to existing music well at all.
> Does your tag editor preserve the file date/time stamp when you make
> adjustments? That may be the case as the scan keys off the last
> modified date IIRC.
>
>
Nope, it updates the time stamp, and SS does pick up things like changed
spelling or punctuation in a record. What it doesn't pick up without a
wipe-and-rescan is new cover art (cover.jpg in the folder), or merges of
albums.

What I mean by merges of albums is this: When I get a multi-CD album, I
remove the DISCNUMBER tag and renumber the files so that they're presented
as a single album (after all, I don't tag specially to show which side of
the LP or which track of the 8-track this song was on). Sometimes I forget
to do this until after SS has already seen the album. It is impossible for
SS to pick up that the Disc 2 album is no longer is existence, even after
all of its tracks are moved to what used to be the Disc 1 album.
--
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin,
So across the Western ocean I must wander" -- traditional

shabbs
2006-10-03, 13:59
What it doesn't pick up without a wipe-and-rescan is new cover art (cover.jpg in the folder), or merges of albums.
New cover art has always needed a clear and rescan to get picked up.

Cheers.