![]() This is badly constructed because it obscures the directory you are about to index, rename etc… It seriously worries me that things that have been on the “wanted feature” list for years and others that are crying out for a product fix are just ignored! The PL7 release provides a ‘Delete’ function for a directory, which does delete everything by the way, but lost “asynchronous” indexing to be replaced by a command attached to the directory i.e. I should think it would be evident in the code (in other words, how hard can it be to make sure that PL can never do this?) It seems that DxO hasn’t figured out why it happens. In spite of the correct use of the designated (by me) PL7 database, PL7 is still using the PL6 cache for better or worse!? Work done in PL7 stays in PL7 work done on PL6 can be migrated into PL7 as a DOP or as a database (or that is the way it has been in the all of this could have been avoided! PL6 DOPs will be accepted by PL7 but not the other way around. The PL6 database can be loaded into PL7 at any stage but not the other way around. PL6 and PL7 should then be accessing their own copies of the same database and will start to diverge at that point if both products are used. Use the DxPL command to restore the backup database for PL6 ![]() Start PL6 and it will encounter the corrupted database issue indicated earlier in the post and create a new one! so there is an issue of carrying over the PL6 database if the user so wishes! For continued use of the old database contents use the ‘Restore’ option and select the PL6 database (the one that PL7 just highjacked) which will require a restart of PL7. I cannot retest the whole installation procedure to test out all the options etc. Install PL7 which appears to then use the previous release (PL6) database and render it useless for use by that previous release.Ĭhoose an appropriate location for the PL7 database in line with your standards or the default/mandatory standards and restart PL7 with the database in that location. Secure the previous (current) release database (create a backup) with a suitable name to enable continued use of the previous release. So when moving to a new release (please note these comments come from a Win 10 user) This was reported during testing but is still present in the released version! I thought I had checked after installing PL7 that it was “pointing” to a PL7 database but while monitoring PL7 file activity I found that it closed the PL6 database and I then got the following when I tried to start PL6.10 In addition PL7 appears to be “re-using” the PL6 database and thereby rendering it useless for any future PL6 activity. to the code file at the start of the download or immediately after the download. Plus keep interim release code files, even though DxO has lost the once sensible strategy of naming each version, I think it was included with PL4 and vanished with PL5 and has not returned on PL6 and PL7.Īll good software developers should number the releases but some don’t (DxO and others) so the user should make sure not to overwrite any code file when downloading and to assign the correct id. Be it as it may, it’s always a good idea to keep the old installers and activation ALWAYS a good policy with all software! Not sure about that, because DxO had removed upgraded versions from my shop account.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |