Author Topic: delay in start-up  (Read 2180 times)

jacquesii

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
I have approximately 644K tracks, about 45K albums, monitored by MusicBee, residing on some 8 different removable drives.

Performance is truly excellent..after things finally fire up, after my 1st daily access is completed.

The issue is, my 1st daily access can take upwards of 7-10 minutes, before I can play anything.

I have tried turning on and off, continuous monitoriing, no discernable difference.  

Any other ideas as to how to improve this, much appreciated!

Cheers from New Zealand!

Steven

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34259
Something definitely seems wrong with that. I have tested libraries that size before and a reasonably powerful machine and it took 30 or so seconds to load.
If you are using an older version than v3.4, try updating from the downloads page.
Most of the time taken is for sorting the data and if you use virtual tags for sorting or grouping that can slow things.
Also try whitelisting musicbee in your security software as that can interfere with musicbee eg. it might be running MB in a sandbox which i imagine would take a long time to initialise
Last Edit: July 19, 2021, 09:16:46 AM by Steven

Zak

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2432
I've also been wondering for a long time about what exactly MusicBee does on startup.
In particular, I see (and hear) heavy disk use for the first five minutes or so.

I "only" have about 150,000 tracks on a local NAS hard drive.

I manually tag my files outside MusicBee before moving them to my main music folder which is set to be continuously monitored.


However, I don't need MusicBee to check anything when it starts up.

With a monitored folder specified, is MusicBee always scanning that folder on startup regardless of the monitored folders radio button selection?
If so, what does the on startup check for updated or missing files checkbox do differently?

Most of the time taken is for sorting the data and if you use virtual tags for sorting or grouping that can slow things.

I do use a lot of convoluted and over-lapping virtual tags for grouping and sorting. Are you saying that MusicBee needs to read tag values from all files or the database in order to work out how to display the files? Is there any way to have MusicBee just start up in the state it was last in without reading all that data each time?

Sorry for so many questions. I've been meaning to ask for a long time and it seems like the OPs question is related.
Thanks again.
Bee excellent to each other...

Steven

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34259
I've also been wondering for a long time about what exactly MusicBee does on startup.
monitored folders are checked for new files, so each sub-folder is scanned to detect a new file.
check for updated or missing files checks every file already in the library is still present and doesnt have a more recent timestamp
Neither of the above would affect startup time
Virtual tags for sorting would only have a minor impact if using v3.3+
Last Edit: July 19, 2021, 09:16:06 AM by Steven

Zak

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2432
monitored folders are checked for new files, so each sub-folder is scanned to detect a new file.
check for updated or missing files checks every file already in the library is still present and doesnt have a more recent timestamp
Okay, having those two options makes sense when you realise the word "updated" in the checkbox label doesn't also include new files.

Neither of the above would affect startup time
True, for me at least. I should have mentioned that my MusicBee is responsive after opening and I can browse to and play tracks as normal while the disk activity is happening in the background, so differs from OP in that regard.
I just wasn't sure about which option was responsible for that disk activity.
Bee excellent to each other...

jacquesii

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Dear Steven,

I found that I was running a fairly old version, 3.2.6902, so I followed your suggestion to install the latest version, reindexed my folders, and that seems to have fixed the problem.

And, for whatever reason, the actual size of the library, under the new version, is about 40% SMALLER than before, another bonus.

Thanks for taking the time to reply, originally, and for providing a great product!

Cheers,

Jim (Auckland NZ)