Photo Organizer

  • Status Closed
  • Percent Complete
    100%
  • Task Type Feature Request
  • Category Backend / Core
  • Assigned To No-one
  • Operating System All
  • Severity Low
  • Priority Very Low
  • Reported Version 2.33
  • Due in Version Undecided
  • Due Date Undecided
  • Votes
  • Private
Attached to Project: Photo Organizer
Opened by poutnik - 2007-05-07
Last edited by pizza - 2009-08-14

FS#205 - Per folder volume

I think it would be useful to have the possibility of several active "volumes" (physical storage directories with respective size limits) and assign specific volume to a specific folder. (and have a default one, too)

This way I could separately store (and later backup) pictures from different cameras - in my case separate volume for digital capture and separate for medium format films - and back up them when they fill up.

I think also others might find this feature useful...

Thanks a lot

Closed by  pizza
2009-08-14 14:15
Reason for closing:  Won't implement
Additional comments about closing:  Closing this for reasons already mentioned. A great deal of added complexity for little benefit.
Admin
pizza commented on 2007-05-07 17:58

This isn't the intended usage model for the whole "volume" management thing. It has two main purposes:

* Make backups easier by splitting the repostiory into manageable chunks.
* Make it easier to scale the repository into multiple physical volumes.

There are a few problems in the way of implementing what you are asking for:

* Users of the system shouldn't have any idea how or where their images are physically stored.
* The "per-folder" distinction is arbitrary, and could be drawn almost anywhere. (ie per-user, per-location, per-client.. etc)
* If you have, say, three active volumes that aren't full, you may end up with much more un-backed-up stuff than if you just used one active volume.
* Greatly complicates the volume selection/management code.

That said, none of these are insurmountable. I have plans to add a few feaures to the current volume management model, but

poutnik commented on 2007-05-07 18:05

Oh, well, OK then...

Admin
pizza commented on 2007-05-08 14:21

As I was saying before I got cut off there, there is a general revamp of the volume management system in the works, and when it happens, I'll see what I can do about incorporating some of your requests.

We're going to need to support some sort of multiple "current" volumes eventually, because of the need to maintain a separation between originals and generated preview/thumbnails, and the fact that once closed (and backed up) a volume needs to be immutable.

The thing that needs to be considered is how to present a "multi volume" capability to users in a way that won't be completely confusing.

plsander commented on 2008-09-03 20:13

Yes -- separation of originals and generated images would be very very nice.

Being able to use offline storage (ie CD/DVD) for the originals while keeping the previews and thumbnails active would be a great space saving addition.

Admin
pizza commented on 2008-09-07 14:11

Right now, in each storage 'volume', originals and generated images are stored in separate subdirectories. It would be pretty simple to move the originals somewhere else once a volume is closed, but managing that is really outside the scope of PO. A case could be made for independent volumes for originals vs generated images, but that doesn't change the complexity of moving originals offline.

The main feature I have on my volume management to-do list is support for multiple image repo "roots", so you don't need symlinks to split your image repo across multiple filesystems.

Loading...

Available keyboard shortcuts

Tasklist

Task Details

Task Editing