You are here: Home » Topic » svn-1696 100% CPU when Firefly is running

svn-1696 100% CPU when Firefly is running

This topic contains 4 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  rpedde 9 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #2108

    Goattee
    Participant

    I am finally operating in a fairly controllable environment after having run Firefly casually for the past 6 months.

    I updated to 1696 a couple months ago and noticed that Firefly wants all available CPU resources whether it is scanning, “idle” or streaming. (Shutting down running programs and optional services only grants Firefly the right to take even more CPU.)

    Is this behavior due to a bug? Are there well-understood mitigation and troubleshooting techniques? (Should I back off to an earlier version?)

    Elsewhere I saw a message asserting that problem media files can touch off this behavior. The writer recommended a trial-and-error approach to find music files that Firefly finds objectionable. Considering that I have a huge 500G music collection, this method could take me forever.

    Thanks for any tips anyone can offer.

    #15754

    stretch
    Participant

    svn-1696 has a bug that kicks in when you do a rescan. The database becomes corrupted & unusable

    To avoid it, you can either switch to an sqlite3 database or drop back to an older version

    #15755

    Goattee
    Participant

    Thanks for the speedy reply. I should have indicated that I was already using sqlite3 with 1696 so I guess my best move is to step back to the next earlier strong version.

    #15756

    Goattee
    Participant
    stretch wrote:
    svn-1696 has a bug that kicks in when you do a rescan. The database becomes corrupted & unusable
    /quote]

    Thanks again.

    I installed over my previous installation stepping back to svn-1586. Because it kept my .conf file, I am still using sqlite3. My smart playlists were preserved. The rescan went smoothly and now current CPU usage is more reasonable.

    My experience tells me that svn-1696 is unsuitable for production use. I can’t wait to see what Ron comes up with for the next major release.

    #15757

    rpedde
    Participant

    @goattee wrote:

    My experience tells me that svn-1696 is unsuitable for production use. I can’t wait to see what Ron comes up with for the next major release.

    Hopefully it will be stable, for one. 🙂

    — Ron

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.