oncloudconnect messages in log
I don't subscribe to ON1 Cloud Sync with PR2022. I've noticed my On1 log file is getting filled up with messages like these that seem to appear at about a one minute interval:
2021-10-24 9:00:19 ON1 - Event (1005) on line 3664 of oncloudconnectservice.cpp
2021-10-24 9:00:19 ON1 - Event (1005) on line 1171 of oncloudconnectsync.cpp
[ 10004] 2021-10-24 9:00:19 ON1 - ON1 Sync: poll server took 0 ms (0 ms API time). Index is
[ 2168] 2021-10-24 9:00:20 ON1 - ON1 Sync: 0 MB storage used.
[ 2168] 2021-10-24 9:00:50 ON1 - ON1 Sync: 0 MB storage used.
2021-10-24 9:01:19 ON1 - Event (1005) on line 3664 of oncloudconnectservice.cpp
2021-10-24 9:01:19 ON1 - Event (1005) on line 1171 of oncloudconnectsync.cpp
[ 10004] 2021-10-24 9:01:19 ON1 - ON1 Sync: poll server took 0 ms (0 ms API time). Index is
[ 2168] 2021-10-24 9:01:20 ON1 - ON1 Sync: 0 MB storage used.
[ 2168] 2021-10-24 9:01:50 ON1 - ON1 Sync: 0 MB storage used.
2021-10-24 9:02:19 ON1 - Event (1005) on line 3664 of oncloudconnectservice.cpp
2021-10-24 9:02:19 ON1 - Event (1005) on line 1171 of oncloudconnectsync.cpp
[ 10004] 2021-10-24 9:02:19 ON1 - ON1 Sync: poll server took 0 ms (0 ms API time). Index is
[ 2168] 2021-10-24 9:02:20 ON1 - ON1 Sync: 0 MB storage used.
[ 2168] 2021-10-24 9:02:50 ON1 - ON1 Sync: 0 MB storage used.
Anyone else seen anything like this?
-
Yes, this is natural. The program is constantly polling the cloud server to see if anything might have been published on another device.
0 -
I've also seen this , and don't understand why this occurs either. If Cloud Sync is disabled, it makes no sense to continuously make calls to the Cloud.
Using the Process Monitor utility from Sysinternals, I also discovered that PR accesses every single drive in my system every second. This includes all USB and SDHC drives, even though they are empty. All of my images are on the D: drive, and I haven't used PR to access any other drive; there's no reason for it to waste cycles pinging drives that it has no business accessing.
I reported these to support, who had little interest in providing a viable explanation for either behavior.
0 -
Because Photo RAW is a browser and you don't import your files to a database ala Lightroom, it has to continually scan your drives looking for any newly added photos, otherwise how would it know about them? Even though you have set your default location to D: the program has no way to know if anything has been placed elsewhere.
0 -
A browser is different than a database or catalog. When cataloging is disabled, there is no reason for PR to be looking for new files. The only time it should scan for images is when I change the current folder in the browser. It might make sense to re-scan the currently selected folder on a regular basis, but certainly not an unselected drive.
Windows File Explorer is a browser, and it does not continually scan for new files on drives or folders that are not selected.
I don't believe that PR could actually be scanning for images every second. It takes longer than a second to scan a drive, and it's hitting all 14 'drives' on my system every second. This appears to be some task that is checking to see what drives are attached, but that seems unnecessary when I'm sitting in the same folder in the browser.
0 -
Windows File Explorer is a browser, and it does not continually scan for new files on drives or folders that are not selected. Another false analogy.The File Explorer is the OS controller for EVERYTHING that happens to your entire file structure. It has has no need to scan for changes; it already knows about them because it was what made them in the first place. Applications don't write directly to drives themselves, they go through the file system.
I don't believe that PR could actually be scanning for images every second. You're right, it doesn't have to actually scan the drive, it queries the OS to tell it about the changes that have been made.
[T]hat seems unnecessary when I'm sitting in the same folder in the browser. The program wants to know when a drive has been disconnected so it won't try to access it after it is gone. You don't want the program trying to access a drive that is no longer there in order to find out that it is no longer there. You have to wait for the I/O request to time out then interpret the error code (don't forget to handle that or the program will crash!). It's is much more efficient. You may not be using Catalogs but they are used and the program has to handle them.
I'm not arguing from actual knowledge of the code, only from what I know about writing code and proper design for programs. I don't see why this is a big deal. It has absolutely no noticeable impact on performance with our multiple core, multi-processor, threaded operating systems. The program doesn't have to stop what it is doing to make the OS requests and wait for the results. When it is properly designed that task gets sent to its own thread and the OS gives it to the processor core best suited to handle the task and if it wasn't for the log entries you wouldn't even know it was happening.
0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
5 comments