Gallery 1.3.2 Rocks!

kahleeb

Joined: 2002-11-04
Posts: 18

Posted: Fri, 2002-12-06 21:53

Okay, so I can't wait to get my hands on the final version of G2. However, while that won't be around for several months (fingers crossed) I decided to upgrade 1.3.2. The upgrade was not as easy as I had thought it would be. However, I was albe to fix my problems by searching for the answers in the Forums.

My main reason for wanting to upgrade is because of the speed increase. While I am not noticing a whole lot of difference in the speed, I happened to try out the Windows XP Publishing Agent. WOW! This saved me a ton of time and allowed me to easily upload over 300 pictures with just a few mouse clicks.

I want to thank the entire team and say thanks for all your hard work. You have made it possible for me to take my HTML photo web site and turn it into an easy to update dynamic Photo Gallery. I can't wait for G2 and will continue to tell all of my friends and family members about Gallery.

bharat

Joined: 2002-05-21
Posts: 7994

Posted: Sat, 2002-12-07 09:48

Thanks for the kind words, kahleeb! Sorry to hear that your upgrade was bumpy, but I'm glad to hear that it was successful.

We're hard at work on G2 which (we hope) will be everything you ever wanted :smile:

bpd@darb.net

Joined: 2002-08-20
Posts: 101

Posted: Sat, 2002-12-07 13:13

yeh i noticed a performance increase on my gallery ... once you go over a few thousand pics you really start noticing it.

ANDDDDD its not eating half a gig o ram !! :smile: (which is just aswell coz my nix box only has 512mb ram so those poor little hard disks were getting worked once it started munching paging ...)

SHS`

Joined: 2002-12-10
Posts: 30

Posted: Tue, 2002-12-10 14:35

I've recently upgraded to v.1.3.2 too, one is a vanilla install, and the other has <A HREF="http://www.snailsource.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=4" TARGET="_blank">WebSnail's phpBB2.0.x integration</A>. :grin:

But I want to have a qualitative improvement on how much less memory PHP is now using.

Now I have one gallery, which currenntly has just under 3k items, most > 1024 x 768 high quality JPEG (no it's not pr0n... :roll: ) and I was seeing trouble even when PHP had a memory limit of 32MB, which I then bumped to 64MB... :eek:

Now I've set it back to the default 8MB, but I'm wondering how far this will go, as pre 1.3.2, it'd (Gallery) would probably start to tank with about 400 - 800 photos, depending on size.

I can see there's a photo.dat and and album.dat, where in most cases album.dat is a few kilobytes, versus 100kb to 200kb for photos.dat. I assume this was just one files, so a fair bit of memory saving when a bunch of galleries are taken into account.

I suppose I could have answered this myself if PHP had a method of tracking memory usage... but I don't think that's possible?

Thanks. :grin:

vallimar

Joined: 2002-08-15
Posts: 487

Posted: Tue, 2002-12-10 17:28

Check how much memory the processes are using.
Compare with task manager under windows and ps or top undix *nix.
The difference in memory consumption was quite a bit for me between
1.3.1 and 1.3.2.

bpd@darb.net

Joined: 2002-08-20
Posts: 101

Posted: Fri, 2002-12-13 03:42

1.3.x is still pretty hungry, its just a bit of an improvement ... i think bharat and the team are well aware of that and version 2 is going to be a killer.

:smile:

kahleeb Joined: 2002-11-04 Posts: 18	Posted: Fri, 2002-12-06 21:53
	Okay, so I can't wait to get my hands on the final version of G2. However, while that won't be around for several months (fingers crossed) I decided to upgrade 1.3.2. The upgrade was not as easy as I had thought it would be. However, I was albe to fix my problems by searching for the answers in the Forums. My main reason for wanting to upgrade is because of the speed increase. While I am not noticing a whole lot of difference in the speed, I happened to try out the Windows XP Publishing Agent. WOW! This saved me a ton of time and allowed me to easily upload over 300 pictures with just a few mouse clicks. I want to thank the entire team and say thanks for all your hard work. You have made it possible for me to take my HTML photo web site and turn it into an easy to update dynamic Photo Gallery. I can't wait for G2 and will continue to tell all of my friends and family members about Gallery.
	XUser login Username: * Password: * Create new account Request new password
bharat Joined: 2002-05-21 Posts: 7994	Posted: Sat, 2002-12-07 09:48
	Thanks for the kind words, kahleeb! Sorry to hear that your upgrade was bumpy, but I'm glad to hear that it was successful. We're hard at work on G2 which (we hope) will be everything you ever wanted :smile:

bpd@darb.net Joined: 2002-08-20 Posts: 101	Posted: Sat, 2002-12-07 13:13
	yeh i noticed a performance increase on my gallery ... once you go over a few thousand pics you really start noticing it. ANDDDDD its not eating half a gig o ram !! :smile: (which is just aswell coz my nix box only has 512mb ram so those poor little hard disks were getting worked once it started munching paging ...)

SHS` Joined: 2002-12-10 Posts: 30	Posted: Tue, 2002-12-10 14:35
	I've recently upgraded to v.1.3.2 too, one is a vanilla install, and the other has <!-- BBCode Start --><A HREF="http://www.snailsource.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=4" TARGET="_blank">WebSnail's phpBB2.0.x integration</A><!-- BBCode End -->. :grin: But I want to have a qualitative improvement on how much less memory PHP is now using. Now I have one gallery, which currenntly has just under 3k items, most > 1024 x 768 high quality JPEG (no it's not pr0n... :roll: ) and I was seeing trouble even when PHP had a memory limit of 32MB, which I then bumped to 64MB... :eek: Now I've set it back to the default 8MB, but I'm wondering how far this will go, as pre 1.3.2, it'd (Gallery) would probably start to tank with about 400 - 800 photos, depending on size. I can see there's a photo.dat and and album.dat, where in most cases album.dat is a few kilobytes, versus 100kb to 200kb for photos.dat. I assume this was just one files, so a fair bit of memory saving when a bunch of galleries are taken into account. I suppose I could have answered this myself if PHP had a method of tracking memory usage... but I don't think that's possible? Thanks. :grin:

vallimar Joined: 2002-08-15 Posts: 487	Posted: Tue, 2002-12-10 17:28
	Check how much memory the processes are using. Compare with task manager under windows and ps or top undix *nix. The difference in memory consumption was quite a bit for me between 1.3.1 and 1.3.2.

bpd@darb.net Joined: 2002-08-20 Posts: 101	Posted: Fri, 2002-12-13 03:42
	1.3.x is still pretty hungry, its just a bit of an improvement ... i think bharat and the team are well aware of that and version 2 is going to be a killer. :smile:

Gallery 1.3.2 Rocks!

XUser login