Herding the Cat Files!

[tom-tomstudio]

Lightroom Version Number

14.4

Operating System

1. macOS 15 Sequoia

Hi everyone,

I am Tom Upton, photographer in Mountain View CA...

New to this forum...longtime LR user. Perhaps too long... I do have the Shadowland Tee though.

Classic, with mac mini Pro and a RAID. The pundits in KelbyLand suggest I have my catalog files on my startup drive...Thus i have been tempted to MOVE IT...Not because of Scott but because the rumor is I can gain some speed. Separate the cat support files from the images/folder. Hopefully without separation anxiety.

I create a new catalog every Year, I know, I know, it is just how my brain works...Currently my Lightroom cat files and my corresponding folders of images for the year's cat are also are on my Raid. Both in a folder for the year.

There are times I notice my sweet little Mini chugging along and not with dispatch. Slowly.

Will moving my year's catalog files to my startup make a difference? (leaving the images on the Raid)

Will I then need to relink missing photos for my folders (it is already August!)

Am I cRazY

Sincerely,
Tom Upton

Photographer
PhotoTainer™
[email protected]

 

[Califdan]

Hi tom and Welcome to the forum. We're neighbors, I'm in Palo alto. Maybe we've cross paths in the Palo Alto Camera club (was digital chair there for 12 years).

So, are you "cRazY"? Well, that's hard for me to judge but in regard to your 1 catalog per year habit, I'd say you are in a vast minority and stuck in 1980's DOS thinking. I'd also say that you should seriously let go of your ancient proclivities and take an unbiased look at 1 catalog = period.

In referenced to performance, the catalog gets most the read/write activity by far so the faster the drive you put it on the better the performance. This is almost alway the internal boot drive (but there are some exceptions mostly with folks who build their own systems from scracth). If you move you catalogs to the internal drive you should not have to relink the image folders on the RAID. but even if you do it's not difficult (albeit you'd have to do it for each catalog.

In general, consumer level RAID drives are not known for their speed so moving the catalogs to the internal drive may produce observable performance improvement (assuming you have enough free space on that drive). But, you'll be losing the redundance of the RAID so absolutlyu must assure some other way to assure protection againsgt a corrupt catalog. BTW, while RAID arrays are great for businesses, in the consumer world while they do offer some protectjion agains a single drive failure (depending on what RAID level you are using) they do not replace a robust backup strategy.

Dan
www.danhartfordphoto.com

 

[tom-tomstudio]

Thank You Dan, yes your name rings a bell and we probably have crossed paths at one point. Thanks for your comments.

IF i were to take your advice, and combine say two or three years of lightroom catalogs into one, THEN, would Lightroom support folders within folders. A folder for the year and then subs for the various project folders within that year? ~TEU

 

[clee01l]

Hi everyone,

.Currently my Lightroom cat files and my corresponding folders of images for the year's cat are also are on my Raid. Both in a folder for the year.

There are times I notice my sweet little Mini chugging along and not with dispatch. Slowly.

Will moving my year's catalog files to my startup make a difference? (leaving the images on the Raid)

Will I then need to relink missing photos for my folders (it is already August!)

Am I cRazY

Sincerely,
Tom Upton

Photographer
PhotoTainer
[email protected]

Moving your master catalog to the primary drive will make the catalog perform faster since you are not encumbered with the slowness of the ethernet (slower still if you are using WiFi.)

If your RAID is locally attached using a TB 3 or 4 port. Then you won’t see any difference.

The Images are not generally accessed after import except to print and export. Because you are using a Mac and the images are stored on a named volume that is not changing, you are not likely to have any connection issues.

You don’t say whether your Mac Mini is Silicon or Intel. So Chugging is not likely to improve if you are still running an intel Mac.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Zenon]

Hi tom and Welcome to the forum. We're neighbors, I'm in Palo alto. Maybe we've cross paths in the Palo Alto Camera club (was digital chair there for 12 years).

So, are you "cRazY"? Well, that's hard for me to judge but in regard to your 1 catalog per year habit, I'd say you are in a vast minority and stuck in 1980's DOS thinking. I'd also say that you should seriously let go of your ancient proclivities and take an unbiased look at 1 catalog = period.

In referenced to performance, the catalog gets most the read/write activity by far so the faster the drive you put it on the better the performance. This is almost alway the internal boot drive (but there are some exceptions mostly with folks who build their own systems from scracth). If you move you catalogs to the internal drive you should not have to relink the image folders on the RAID. but even if you do it's not difficult (albeit you'd have to do it for each catalog.

In general, consumer level RAID drives are not known for their speed so moving the catalogs to the internal drive may produce observable performance improvement (assuming you have enough free space on that drive). But, you'll be losing the redundance of the RAID so absolutlyu must assure some other way to assure protection againsgt a corrupt catalog. BTW, while RAID arrays are great for businesses, in the consumer world while they do offer some protectjion agains a single drive failure (depending on what RAID level you are using) they do not replace a robust backup strategy.

Dan
www.danhartfordphoto.com

I saw Frank Zappa at the university of Palo Alto around 1979.

 

[Replytoken]

Thank You Dan, yes your name rings a bell and we probably have crossed paths at one point. Thanks for your comments.

IF i were to take your advice, and combine say two or three years of lightroom catalogs into one, THEN, would Lightroom support folders within folders. A folder for the year and then subs for the various project folders within that year? ~TEU

LRC does support nested folders.

--Ken

 

[Califdan]

Nested folders are no problem. Here's an example

 

[Gnits]

To complement on comments above.

Make sure you keep at least 100GB free (or 10% ) on your system drive. Any less will choke the o/s and Lightroom as work files are needed by the o/s and LrC).
Some Mac Mini internal drives are not as fast as others.
A modern external SSD drive via a modern Thunderbolt cable is a good option, provided you have a good automated back up routine. (I keep my catalog and last 2 years images on a Samsung T9 drive).
You can create a 2026 folder right now so that it would be painless to start building a multi year catalog next January. You can decide on what drive you wish to store 2026 images and they can be on any drive.. no need to have them on the same drive as the catalog.
When you are comfortable using 2025 and 2026 in the same catalog then you can make a call on what you want to do with your archival catalogs. One option is to leave them as they are, but review your backup strategy.

The use of the term RAID for non server / non commercial based systems (in other words… not supported by contracted support services) is usually a clue to the age of the system and may be approaching end of life any way.

Current versions of LrC are far more demanding on hardware than older versions and each new release will push that performance requirement further and further. New features become possible as hardware becomes more powerful.

 

[orionlockhart63]

Hi tom and Welcome to the forum. We're neighbors, I'm in Palo alto. Maybe we've cross paths in the Palo Alto Camera club (was digital chair there for 12 years).

So, are you "cRazY"? Well, that's hard for me to judge but in regard to your 1 catalog per year habit, I'd say you are in a vast minority and stuck in 1980's DOS thinking. I'd also say that you should seriously let go of your ancient proclivities and take an unbiased look at 1 catalog = period.

In referenced to performance, the catalog gets most the read/write activity by far so the faster the drive you put it on the better the performance. This is almost alway the internal boot drive (but there are some exceptions mostly with folks who build their own systems from scracth). If you move you catalogs to the internal drive you should not have to relink the image folders on the RAID. but even if you do it's not difficult (albeit you'd have to do it for each catalog.

In general, consumer level RAID drives are not known for their speed so moving the catalogs to the internal drive may produce observable performance improvement (assuming you have enough free space on that drive). But, you'll be losing the redundance of the RAID so absolutlyu must assure some other way to assure protection againsgt a corrupt catalog. BTW, while RAID arrays are great for businesses, in the consumer world while they do offer some protectjion agains a single drive failure (depending on what RAID level you are using) they do not replace a robust backup strategy.
Chicken Jockey Clicker
Dan
www.danhartfordphoto.com

Hi Tom! Moving your catalog to the startup drive can improve speed, especially with previews and edits. You shouldn’t need to relink photos if folder paths remain unchanged. Your yearly catalog method sounds organized—not crazy at all!

 

[Paul_DS256]

Will moving my year's catalog files to my startup make a difference? (leaving the images on the Raid)

Will I then need to relink missing photos for my folders (it is already August!)

Look at some of Victoria's eBooks and tutorials for insights in moving LrC files around.

 

[tom-tomstudio]

Moving your master catalog to the primary drive will make the catalog perform faster since you are not encumbered with the slowness of the ethernet (slower still if you are using WiFi.)

If your RAID is locally attached using a TB 3 or 4 port. Then you won’t see any difference.

The Images are not generally accessed after import except to print and export. Because you are using a Mac and the images are stored on a named volume that is not changing, you are not likely to have any connection issues.

You don’t say whether your Mac Mini is Silicon or Intel. So Chugging is not likely to improve if you are still running an intel Mac.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My Mini Pro is Apple Silicon, my RAID is Pegasus R3, 40T, (with 4, WD enterprise level Red drives) with thunderbolt 3 ports.

 

[tom-tomstudio]

Look at some of Victoria's eBooks and tutorials for insights in moving LrC files around.

Thanks Paul for the links, WOW...can it be THAT easy? ~T

 

[camner]

FWIW, I found a Mac Mini Pro M4 with 24GB not up to the tasks I was asking of it. Nearly constant high memory pressure, lots of fan roaring, which I didn’t object to for the noise as much as I took it as a sign I was (over?)taxing the Mac mini. I switched to a Mac Studio M4 Max with 64GB and am happy as a clam. It isn’t as fast or powerful as an Ultra, of course, but I can’t honestly say that I need the Ultra for my purposes.

 

[Paul_DS256]

FWIW, I found a Mac Mini Pro M4 with 24GB not up to the tasks I was asking of it.

I have the same except with 32GB of memory with no complaints. SSD primary drive where the CATALOG is located. Pictures on an external drive.

Careful what else you have running while using LrC.

 

[Zenon]

I have the same except with 32GB of memory with no complaints. SSD primary drive where the CATALOG is located. Pictures on an external drive.

Careful what else you have running while using LrC.

I'm the same. 32GB with LR folder on the SSD. Files stored in external drive. I usually just have PS and Canon's DPP open but the aren't actually being used. No complaints except I'm waiting for Adobe to enable the Neural Engine again. Not really a complaint but it would be nice.

 

[camner]

I have the same except with 32GB of memory with no complaints. SSD primary drive where the CATALOG is located. Pictures on an external drive.

Careful what else you have running while using LrC.

That’s part of my issue. I wasn’t happy with a setup that required me to shut things down in order to satisfactorily run other things. I don’t need EVERYTHING I use open all the time, of course, but I want my computer to have idle processes open and I don’t want to have to manually manage that. I think that my issues were likely more due to insufficient RAM than an insufficient CPU.

 

[Paul_DS256]

That’s part of my issue. I wasn’t happy with a setup that required me to shut things down in order to satisfactorily run other things.

Agreed but then you have to purchase memory greater than all the apps you want open at one time to avoid constraints and swapping.

 

[camner]

Agreed but then you have to purchase memory greater than all the apps you want open at one time to avoid constraints and swapping.

My biggest memory hog is my browser…I tend to keep too many tabs open at once. I’ve never figured out a good system for managing tabs I want to go back to at some point but not too soon. Bookmarking tabs I want to go back to but don’t need to keep around is a pain and I’ve never been consistent at it. I’ve used the OneTab extension to manage this to some degree. I really don’t understand why browsers don’t just manage tabs themselves by unloading tabs (without closing them) that reach a certain point of time since they’ve been touched. Yes, that would slow down tab switching, but if the time interval were user adjustable (down to “don’t EVER unload any tabs), that would take care of it, wouldn’t it?