>>24336
Thank you for reporting this. I can't carry over, since the first guy is just counting while the second guy gets richer info, but I will figure out some sort of deferred count or pause or whatever feels good and saves you time.
>>24338
>>24339
>>24340
>>24342
Just to add here, if you fully deleted the PTR service under
services->manage tags, and you don't see any PTR tab when you open 'manage tags', then these tags are not from the PTR. Tags won't bleed from the PTR to your like 'downloader tags' or 'my tags' etc...
If you only paused the PTR sync and it still exists, then these tags could be from the PTR. If you open up 'manage tags' on one of these problem files, under which tag service tab are these tags listed? Is it 'my tags'?
If you have
local tags appearing on a file as soon as it is imported from hard drive, with no 'add these tags on import' stuff like sidecars or filename tagging going on, then there's two possibilities I can think of:
1) The file was in your client before, you tagged it then, and then deleted it, and then it was re-imported. Hydrus doesn't delete tags from deleted files, so all that survives a delete/re-import cycle.
2) You've done some funky tag migration stuff before, likely with a Hydrus Tag Archive or a PTR migration, using
tags->migrate tags. If you set up a tag migration on 'all known files' using sha256 hashes, then hydrus can apply tags to files it hasn't imported yet.
Let me know if you discover anything else here! If you hadn't thought of it, I think you can go ['system:number of tags > 0', '-creator:*'] to better find these files.
>>24350
Thanks. Yeah, this sucks. I'll put some work in here.
>>24354
This is an interesting question. I had intended for auto-resolution rules to have a clever 'examine pairs of lowest quality against the next highest quality first' so I could reduce some false negatives, but when I figured out the sort code for pairs, it just doesn't fit into the auto-resolution system, which I have tuned to have extremely low per-pair overhead.
For now, it just reads straight off the db without sorting, and I think due to luck really, and probably legacy structures, that mostly means smaller ids first. We are seeing similar files next to each other because of similar import and tagging times.
I think I agree with you--a completely random feed is more useful, and we should choose to do that. I'll have a think about it all. I still want my low overhead, but perhaps I can be clever about the initial insert or something.