Re: Digikam-users Digest, Vol 242, Issue 11

Steve Franks <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.kde.digikam.user
Message-ID <CAAChAXUYrt1GQd0phVTV+xZc57mAaL+uXQv0HbgxLkkqY4G1Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks Gilles, that makes sense.
I don’t think that I need the logs, so I will amend the MariaDB
configuration.
Best regards
Steve

On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 at 18:42, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Send Digikam-users mailing list submissions to
>         [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         [email protected]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         [email protected]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Digikam-users digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: digikam mysql-bin files (Gilles Caulier)
>    2. Re: Still cant figure out face recognition under 8.7
>       (Chad Bersche)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Gilles Caulier <[email protected]>
> To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the
> power of open source <[email protected]>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 18:37:53 +0200
> Subject: Re: digikam mysql-bin files
> Hi Steve,
>
> The files you're referring to are binary log files used by MariaDB (or
> MySQL) for replication and certain data recovery operations. They are
> not specific to digiKam but are instead a feature of the database
> system that digiKam uses.
>
> Here's a brief explanation of these files:
>
> Binary Logs (binlogs): These logs record all data changes in the
> database, which can be used for replication and point-in-time
> recovery. Each log file is assigned a sequential number, and the files
> can accumulate over time.
>
> Given that these files are taking up a significant amount of space,
> you might want to manage them. Here are some steps you can take:
>
> Check if Binary Logging is Necessary: If you are not using replication
> or point-in-time recovery, you might not need binary logging at all.
> You can disable binary logging in your MariaDB configuration file
> (my.cnf or my.ini).
>
> Purge Old Binary Logs: If you need binary logging, you can still purge
> old logs that are no longer necessary. MariaDB provides commands to do
> this safely:
>
> PURGE BINARY LOGS BEFORE '2024-01-01 00:00:00';
>
> This command will delete all binary log files created before the
> specified date and time.
>
> Set an Expiration Period: You can configure MariaDB to automatically
> purge binary logs after a certain period. This can be done by setting
> the expire_logs_days variable in your MariaDB configuration file.
>
> Backup and Remove: Before deleting any files manually, ensure you have
> a complete backup of your database. If you decide to manually remove
> the files, you should also update the binary log index file to reflect
> the changes.
>
> Consult Documentation: Always refer to the official MariaDB
> documentation or consult with a database administrator to ensure you
> are following best practices for your specific setup.
>
> If you are unsure about any of these steps, it might be best to
> consult with someone who has experience with MariaDB administration to
> avoid any potential data loss or corruption...
>
> My best
>
> Gilles Caulier
>
>
> Le ven. 11 juil. 2025 à 17:48, Steve Franks <[email protected]> a écrit :
> >
> > My PC has 357 pairs of files named mysql-bin.999999 and
> mysql-bin.99999.bin in the digikam\.mysql.digikam\db_data folder.These are
> taking up 51.5GB on my SSD so I would like to remove any that are not
> necessary.
> > Is this a digikam issue, or MariaDB? Are they all necessary? Are any of
> them necessary?
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Steve
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Chad Bersche <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 12:42:00 -0500
> Subject: Re: Still cant figure out face recognition under 8.7
>
> Well, at least it's not just me.  Let's hope there's a way to reproduce
> the issue, and hopefully a remedy can be forthcoming, as the face
> recognition, along with the map data, is one of the key items I wanted out
> of DigiKam.  I'm just starting with it, having just gotten it working with
> an external MySQL/MariaDB with 8.7, so I'm ready to go forward and make
> great use of it.
>
>   --Chad
>
>
> On 7/11/2025 11:31 AM, Charlie Gorichanaz wrote:
>
> Wow, I actually am seeing the same behavior currently. For the record,
> Arch linux cache files tell me I upgraded to 8.6.0 June 5, and then to
> 8.7.0 June 30. I don't think I did any face tagging work since June 30
> until I tried yesterday.
>
> I previously had around 300 items in my "Unconfirmed" folder according to
> the number after that word in parentheses, but none were showing up when I
> clicked on it. I ran a "Recognize faces only" on a large chunk of my albums
> with the quality slider bumped down from 7 to 6, hoping to catch a lot more
> faces. The end result changed that tag to say "Unconfirmed (0)". Then I ran
> a full "Scan all images" process on a section of my library I had not
> processed yet. It then told me it found 282 faces, and my unknown tag
> increased to now say "Unknown (3262)", but I still have "Unconfirmed (0)".
>
> So maybe something about this broke in 8.7.0?!
>
> —
> Charlie Gorichanaz
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 5:46 AM Chad Bersche <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Charlie, et. al
>>
>> I have an Unconfirmed tag, but it has zero images in it, even after
>> multiple "recognize faces" runs.
>>
>> Once I did the initial scan all images, the Unknown tag had ~6000 images
>> in it.  I classified probably ~800 of those naming individuals correctly.
>> I then re-ran the process as you indicated using "Recognize faces only" on
>> all of my albums.  I watched it as it zoomed thru images, showing faces in
>> the process of those in the image that it'd previously detected.  At the
>> conclusion of the face detection, which took several minutes, it came back
>> stating it scanned over 5,533 images and found ZERO faces.  Nothing moved
>> from Unknown to Unconfirmed.  This is the same outcome every single time
>> I've tried this.
>>
>> So, what now?  I've been tempted to try to re-create the training data,
>> but haven't done so yet.
>>
>>   -- Chad
>>
>>
>> On 7/10/2025 10:07 PM, Charlie Gorichanaz wrote:
>>
>> Chad,
>>
>> Do you have a tag called "Unconfirmed" alongside your "Unknown" tag? I
>> believe that's where the detected-and-potentially-matched faces should end
>> up, waiting for you to confirm or reject them.
>>
>> The doc describes this under the Face recognition section, "To start this
>> process, go to the workflow tab, select *Recognize faces only*, and then
>> click *Scan Collection For Faces*. The process will tag similar
>> *detected* faces with the appropriate People tag from your tag tree, and
>> the corresponding thumbnail will disappear from the *Unknown* tag
>> selection. The thumbnail will appear in the *Unconfirmed* tag section
>> and will be added to the suggested face tag section."
>>
>> —
>> Charlie Gorichanaz
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 7:14 PM Chad A. Bersche <chad-3WafWbCuLW2IwRZHo2/[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I've been baffled by this as well. I'm running on Windows 11, DigiKam
>>> 8.7, and downloaded all the modules.  I let it grind thru a bunch of my
>>> libraries overnight.  It resulted in about 6000 images in the Unknown
>>> category.  I spent a a couple hours assigning names to people in that
>>> list (sometimes up to 200-300 images).  I still have 5500 in the Unknown
>>> bucket after classifying several hundred.
>>>
>>> After doing that, I went to run the "Recognize faces only" with
>>> Accuracy=7, Search in set to "All Albums" and Tags unchecked. Then when
>>> I do the "Scan collection for faces" nothing changes, and all the same
>>> Unknown images stay in the same Unknown bucket.
>>>
>>> What am I doing wrong?  I had hoped that tagging a good number of faces
>>> before doing the recognition would improve its accuracy, but it seems to
>>> just want me to do all the assignment work, which I kinda don't want to
>>> do.
>>>
>>> I'm using an external SQL database, with the database running on Linux,
>>> because I do use the same image libraries across Windows clients.
>>>
>>> Thanks for any help/suggestions!
>>>
>>>    -- Chad
>>>
>>> On 7/8/2025 10:43 PM, Gilles Caulier wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > You need to first detect faces on albums before you recognize them.
>>> > After detecting, manually tag a few faces with names, at least a few
>>> > ones are enough to teach the AI for an automated recognition.
>>> >
>>> > Finally, run a recognition process and look as AI recognizes similar
>>> > faces already registered in the model but not yet tagged in the
>>> > database.
>>> >
>>> > The workflow is explained in the online doc :
>>> > https://docs.digikam.org/en/left_sidebar/people_view.html
>>> <https://link.bersche.com/click/20qyoQWWIOi2.29UmT_C0unWi.UJlc-QSwsLm/hoVYqVvO/3s/link.bersche.com/click/JrntK3g7lIuw.vrQMszT3ZBH1.tlPdogxGHMJ/IxL1-iQT/3s/docs.digikam.org/en/left_sidebar/people_view.html>
>>> >
>>> > Best
>>> >
>>> > Gilles Caulier
>>> >
>>> > Le mer. 9 juil. 2025 à 02:08, robert lindsay
>>> > <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>> >> This is under intel mac os and I installed the modules it asked for
>>> in installation. Under face recognition their are boxes for rebuilding and
>>> training data, but i can't find on to start face recognition on albums
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.