Sql server version of Photo Supreme

[thenetstriker]

Is there a plan to make an sql server (or MySql, or just any other multi user database) version of Photo Supreme? The centralized sql server database was the main critera for me to buy IDImager and I do not want to work with local databases any more.

[Hert]

This is currently not planned. If there is a large enough demand, I'll consider it.

Hert

[UPDATE Aug 14 2013; a SQLServer version of Photo Supreme will be released soon!]

[tstoddard]

My company has recently begun and initiative to start cataloging out photo and video files. Right now we are using Lightroom primarily because our in-house graphic artist uses Adobe's Creative Suite. We were disappointing in Lightroom's lack of multi-user support and would definitely consider using Photo Supreme if it gave us that ability. We do use Microsoft SQL Server but we also use MySQL for some applications. SQL Server would be the optimum solution for us but we could go either way.

I hope you find that there is a lot of support for this. Judging from some active conversations I've read on Lightroom blogs, it seems that there are many Lightroom users who would be happy to have multi-user capabilities. Perhaps this would be an opportunity for Photo Supreme to take some market share away from Lightroom.

[dimaip]

+1.
As a temporary solution to enable multi-user viewing without locking, I'm thinking of creating a windows shell script, that would clone existing database, run PSU with it and, possibly, delete database on exit.
BTW, what command line parameters are supported by PSU?

Hert, anyways eventually you'll come to idea that you need a pro version of PSU. All of these complaints on the forum are caused by the lack of such perspective. PSU is NOT a completely different product to IDI, as you had said. PSU is a thousand times better product, which can serve as a foundation to a great PRO (more expensive) version. The multi-user access is just one of such examples.

Regards,
Dmitri

[george]

Hert, anyways eventually you'll come to idea that you need a pro version of PSU. All of these complaints on the forum are caused by the lack of such perspective. PSU is NOT a completely different product to IDI, as you had said. PSU is a thousand times better product, which can serve as a foundation to a great PRO (more expensive) version. The multi-user access is just one of such examples.

Hi Dmitri,

I hope Hert reads your post. You make a lot of sense (as always). The original stance that IDI and PSU would not be compared was shortsighted, as Hert himself later demonstrated by participating in the comparison thread. A professional version is an excellent idea, and I for one would be willing to pay double or more what is currently being charged for PSU.

[weidmic]

Hert, anyways eventually you'll come to idea that you need a pro version of PSU. All of these complaints on the forum are caused by the lack of such perspective. PSU is NOT a completely different product to IDI, as you had said. PSU is a thousand times better product, which can serve as a foundation to a great PRO (more expensive) version. The multi-user access is just one of such examples.

Hi Dmitri,

I hope Hert reads your post. You make a lot of sense (as always). The original stance that IDI and PSU would not be compared was shortsighted, as Hert himself later demonstrated by participating in the comparison thread. A professional version is an excellent idea, and I for one would be willing to pay double or more what is currently being charged for PSU.

+1

[moritz]

We would absolutely love to see a multi-user version.

See my other post of our company's situation:
http://forum.idimager.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=21842

[dimaip]

MSSQL is not only good for multiuser access. The other aspect is stability and safety of data. During 2 weeks of testing, my thumbs databases has been corrupt a few times, then now my main database is said to be malformed when updating search indexes and so on... During five years using of MSSQL I didn't have a single failure.
SQLite is a very good technology, but it's very easy to break: the database backend and application itself are in one, so when PSU hangs during database operation, there's a good chance of corrupting a database. And PSU hangs quite so often on me, whereas having MSSQL to fail is a real rarity.
You'd say use a daily backups - sure, that's fine, but the problem is that I can't immediately see when the corruption took place. For example, the corruption could have crept in, but I would detect it only a month later, so then to repair a fault, I would either have to redo the month's work or try to merge the changes from the corrupt DB, which is not very easy to do either.
The measures I could take to make the situation not so freaky is probably to compact the DB daily, because during compacting the faults of the database are almost always seen. Maybe you have any other thoughts on this?

Do you understand my concern?
Dmitri

[Hert]

so when PSU hangs during database operation, there's a good chance of corrupting a database.

This is incorrect. There's only a chance of corrupting a SQLite database when there is a power failure *during* a write operation. Even that can be prevented by setting a higher security level, which I don't use because of the performance penalty. It can be set with a registry tweak though.

Hert

[dimaip]

Hert, sorry for my amatuer assumption, but how do you explain the fact that cases of SQLite database corruption are very common, while MSSQL databases almost never get corrupt? Just search this forum: there are tens of threads regarding SQLite database corruption, and none about MSSQL.
Regardless, what's your opinion regarding my last question:

You'd say use a daily backups - sure, that's fine, but the problem is that I can't immediately see when the corruption took place. For example, the corruption could have crept in, but I would detect it only a month later, so then to repair a fault, I would either have to redo the month's work or try to merge the changes from the corrupt DB, which is not very easy to do either.
The measures I could take to make the situation not so freaky is probably to compact the DB daily, because during compacting the faults of the database are almost always seen. Maybe you have any other thoughts on this?

[andrew.heard]

Can I throw postgresql into the server mix for future consideration as a replacement for MSSQL. See http://www.postgresql.org for more info. postgresql is free, open source, has a huge developer following & user base, runs equally well on Windows AND MacOS X. As far as I know MSSQL wouldn't be a good fit for Apple PS users out there.

[dimaip]

Andrew, in the early days of IDI Hert had evaluated different DB backends, including mysql and postgre. I can't find the thread now, but as far as I can remember, only the performance of MSSQL and SQLite sufficed with the kind of operation that IDI needed. Maybe now it's time to reconsider...

Dmitri.

[Hert]

A SQLServer version of Photo Supreme will be released soon!

[stevehughes]

YES ! Amen ! Hallelujah ! <add any other superlatives that seem fitting>.

+1 from me to the above discussion though I'm late to the party.

That is excellent news. The landscape seems very sparse with regard to genuine multi-user DAMs. I'm sure that a PRO version of PSU would receive very significant interest. I for one will be putting my hand up for it.

Any estimate of timing ? Weeks ? Months ?

Steve.

[Hert]

Any estimate of timing ? Weeks ? Months ?

Certainly not months.

I'm sure that a PRO version of PSU

All PSU versions are "PRO" versions!

Hert