Vault size smaller than Library

I have 30k referenced photos (188 gb) with a Library size of 11 gb. The Vault size is only 1.7 gb! This makes me nervous. In the past, both have been about the same size. What is happening?? thank you

Here is more detail: I started with a 7gb Library, with about 6gb of managed files and limited referenced files. I then brought in all of my old files with Import Folder into Project, which added 28k files. After that, the Library went to 16 gb (seems large!). Next I relocated the managed files out, about 6 gb, and the Library shrunk to 10 gb. I did a new Vault store and the Vault size shrunk from the original 7 gb to 1.7gb. I can also see along side of it the Deleted files, 6gb, of those moved out.
If I look in the Vault at a given folder (from the Import Folder into Project), its size is 313mb; the same folder in the Library is 2.2 gb. Looking at a given imported project, Library has a folder of 17mb, AP.Minis of 41mb and AP.Thumb of 76mb. The same file in the Vault has a folder of 20 mb and several little 8k things. Clearly thumbnails were generated although Preview was turned off, and tested that I could not drag thumbs out.
Hope this helps, thanks, gib

Similar Messages

  • How do I play a Keynote 09v5.3 slideshow on my iMac at a size smaller than fullscreen?

    How do I play a Keynote09v5.3 slideshow on my iMac at a size smaller than fullscreen?

    Hi Gary
    Thanks for a conclusive answer.
    Regards
    Orchardhouse

  • Why the flashback log'size smaller than the archived log ?

    hi, all . why the flashback log'size smaller than the archived log ?

    Lonion wrote:
    hi, all . why the flashback log'size smaller than the archived log ?Both are different.
    Flash logs size depends on parameter DB_FLASHBACK_RETENTION_TARGET , how much you want to keep.
    Archive log files is dumped file of Online redo log files, It can be either size of Online redo log file size or less depending on online redo size when switch occurred.
    Some more information:-
    Flashback log files can be created only under the Flash Recovery Area (that must be configured before enabling the Flashback Database functionality). RVWR creates flashback log files into a directory named “FLASHBACK” under FRA. The size of every generated flashback log file is again under Oracle’s control. According to current Oracle environment – during normal database activity flashback log files have size of 8200192 bytes. It is very close value to the current redo log buffer size. The size of a generated flashback log file can differs during shutdown and startup database activities. Flashback log file sizes can differ during high intensive write activity as well.
    Source:- http://dba-blog.blogspot.in/2006/05/flashback-database-feature.html
    Edited by: CKPT on Jun 14, 2012 7:34 PM

  • Physical disk IO size smaller than fragment block filesystem size ?

    Hello,
    in one default UFS filesystem we have 8K block size (bsize) and 1K fragmentsize (fsize). At this scenary I thought all "FileSytem IO" will be 8K (or greater) but never smaller than the fragment size (1K). If a UFS fragment/blocksize is allwasy several ADJACENTS sectors on disk (in a disk with sector=512B), all "physical disk IO" it will allways, like "Filesystem IO", greater than 1K.
    But with dtrace script from DTrace Toolkit (bitesize.d) I can see IO with 512B size.
    ¿What is wrong in my assumptions or what is the explanation?
    Thank you very much in advance!!

    rar wrote:
    Like Jim has indicated me in unix.com forum, That cross-post thread happens to be:
    http://www.unix.com/unix-advanced-expert-users/215823-physical-disk-io-size-smaller-than-fragment-block-filesystem-size.html
    You could have pasted the URL to be polite ...

  • Vault is notably smaller than Library. How to audit a vault?

    Hi -
    A few weeks ago I got a vault error that stated some files could not be backed up. I resolved the error, and even after updating my vault again, the vault came out about 3 gigs smaller than my main library, which is about 80 gigs.
    Is that a common experience? Is there something in the main Library that the Vault does not copy, thus saving itself a notable percentage?
    I have checked my Vault package contents to be sure everything looks present at the top level, but I don't know a time efficient method for auditing the contetns of a vault. However, I have seen comments here from people who seem to be auditing vaults, so could anyone who has such knowledge give some advice on that?
    Thanks!

    Have you accounted for differences in block size allocation for different sized hard drives? The same amount of data on two differently sized hard drives can take up different amounts of hard drive space due to size of the blocks a drive allocates for the smallest amount of data stored on a hard drive. For a few large files, the difference is likely small. For a lot of small files, it can make a big difference.

  • Backup vault always smaller than the library...?

    My backup vault is alvays about 1 GB smaller than the original Aperture Library. How come? Is this right?

    Thanks Now I can sleep well again.

  • Exported video size smaller than original video size. How do I keep the original size?

    I exporting a video from Adobe Premiere CS6 today, and I noticed the video was about 1/2 times smaller  than the original video I put in. I then uploaded the video on YouTube, and the size was still the same. I tried to change the preset to 1080p 29.97, 1080p 25, etc. and the same with 720p, and 480p, but the size only changed slightly.
    How do I keep the original size after exportation of videos?

    More information needed for someone to help... please click below and provide the requested information
    -Information FAQ http://forums.adobe.com/message/4200840
    Also, exactly what are you editing, and what are your export settings?
    Also, The tutorial list in message #3 http://forums.adobe.com/message/2276578 may help

  • Why is my "Combined PDF" file size smaller than the original files?

    Hello!
    I am trying to combine two individual PDF files into a single PDF. Each file is 32mb, however when I use acrobat to combine them, the newly created "combined" file is only 19mb. I believe I've taken the necessary steps to ensure no degradation is happening (i.e. selecting Large File Size in the options panel), but I am still puzzled as to how two files can be put together as one and be smaller than the two separate files with out any compression. What am I missing?
    Thanks in advance!

    When you combine a file it does a "Save As" operation.  This re-writes all of the PDF object in the single file and is supposed to clean up the file, whereas the single files may have had multiple saves which when you look at the internals of the PDF file simply add on to the end of the file.  In other words you get a more cleanly written and optimized file that is also saved for Fast Web View.

  • IPhoto library size smaller than original collection

    I've seen several iphoto library size questions but nothing seems close to my own situation.  If anything, it's mostly the other way around. Apologies if this has already been covered but I've searched long and hard!
    I have my photo collection in two places- an iPhoto library and separately stored in a finder folder called "Photos".  For backup purposes and in case anything goes wrong, I prefer to have them doubled up like this.  My iPhoto library is 7.96GB when viewed in finder, whereas the folder "Photos" is 8.95GB.  The same number of images are in both.  Can anyone shed some light onto why this would be the case?  There are no other items contained in either collection, movies etc., just the same amount of photos in various folders within folders.  Surely the iPhoto library would be at least as big, if not bigger with thumbs, photos modified etc?

    I would expect the iPhoto Library to be significantly bigger than the folder tree so something is not right.
    Are you running a Managed or a Referenced Library?
    A Managed Library, is the default setting, and iPhoto copies files into the iPhoto Library when Importing. The files are then stored in the Library package
    A Referenced Library is when iPhoto is NOT copying the files into the iPhoto Library when importing because you made a change at iPhoto -> Preferences -> Advanced. The files are then stored where ever you put them and not in the Library package. In this scenario you are responsible for the File Management.
    BTW:  Storing the files in a folder tree and iPhoto on the same disk is a waste of space and not a back up. A back up needs to be on a separate disk, at least. The most common problems are disk issues. Such a set up offer no protection whatever from that.
    Regards
    TD

  • Screen size smaller than 1024x768?

    Hi all,
    I'm working on a project that is being done on 1024x768
    screen size. I don't get to resize the screen as with widescreen
    monitor it gets a bid odd when resized for a non-native resolution.
    So my questions is, do you reckon that there are many computer out
    there with screen res less than 1024x768? The project is going to
    be sent to an target audience in England, medium to large company
    sized. Thanks for your input

    thanks. Went back for a second look and they are indeed the same size. I was thrown off by how the menu in the newest version is structured. Is that new menu style available as an update, or only specific to the new classics?

  • Database Block Size Smaller Than Operating System Block Size

    Finding that your database block size should be in multiples of your operating system block size is easy...
    But what if the reverse of the image below were the case?
    What happens when you store an Oracle Data Block that is 2 KB in an 8 KB Operating System Block?  Does it waste 6 KB or are there 4 Oracle Data Blocks stored in 1 Operating System Block?
    Is it different if you use ASM?
    I'd like to introduce a 2 KB block size into a RAC Exadata environment for a small set of highly transactional tables and indexes to reduce contention on blocks being requested in the Global Cache.  I've witnessed horrendous wait times for a plethora of sessions when a block was highly active.
    One index in particular has a column that indicates the "state" of the record, it is a very dense index.  Records will flood in, and then multiple processes will poll, do work, and change the state of the record.  The record eventually reaches a final state and is never updated again.
    I know that I can fill up the block with fluff by adjusting the percent free, percent used, and initrans, but that seems like a lazy hack to me and I'd like to do it right if possible.
    Any thoughts or wisdom is much appreciated.
    "The database requests data in multiples of data blocks, not operating system blocks."
    "In contrast, an Oracle block is a logical storage structure whose size and structure are not known to the operating system."
    http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e25789/logical.htm#BABDCGIB

    But what if the reverse of the image below were the case?
    What happens when you store an Oracle Data Block that is 2 KB in an 8 KB Operating System Block?  Does it waste 6 KB or are there 4 Oracle Data Blocks stored in 1 Operating System Block?
    Is it different if you use ASM?
    I'd like to introduce a 2 KB block size into a RAC Exadata environment for a small set of highly transactional tables and indexes to reduce contention on blocks being requested in the Global Cache.  I've witnessed horrendous wait times for a plethora of sessions when a block was highly active.
    One index in particular has a column that indicates the "state" of the record, it is a very dense index.  Records will flood in, and then multiple processes will poll, do work, and change the state of the record.  The record eventually reaches a final state and is never updated again.
    I know that I can fill up the block with fluff by adjusting the percent free, percent used, and initrans, but that seems like a lazy hack to me and I'd like to do it right if possible.
    Any thoughts or wisdom is much appreciated.
    "The database requests data in multiples of data blocks, not operating system blocks."
    "In contrast, an Oracle block is a logical storage structure whose size and structure are not known to the operating system."
    http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e25789/logical.htm#BABDCGIB
    You could have answered your own questions if you had just read the top of the page in that doc you posted the link for
    >
    At the finest level of granularity, Oracle Database stores data in data blocks. One logical data block corresponds to a specific number of bytes of physical disk space, for example, 2 KB. Data blocks are the smallest units of storage that Oracle Database can use or allocate.
    An extent is a set of logically contiguous data blocks allocated for storing a specific type of information. In Figure 12-2, the 24 KB extent has 12 data blocks, while the 72 KB extent has 36 data blocks.
    >
    There isn't any 'wasted' space using 2KB Oracle blocks for 8KB OS blocks. As the doc says Oracle allocates 'extents' and an extent, depending on your space management, is going to be a substantial multiple of blocks. You might typically have extents that are multiples of 64 KB and that would be 8 OS blocks for your example. Yes - it is possible that the very first OS block and the very last block might not map exactly to the Oracle blocks  but for a table of any size that is unlikely to be much of an issue.
    The single-block reads used for some index accesses could affect performance since the read of a 2K Oracle block will result in an 8K OS block being read but that 8K block is also likely to be part of the same index.
    The thing is though that an index entry that is 'hot' is going to be hot whether the block it is in is 2K or 8K so any 'contention' for that entry will exist regardless of the block size.
    You will need to conduct tests using a 2K (or other) block and cache size for your index tablespaces and see which gives you the best results for your access patterns.
    You should use the standard block size for ALL tablespaces unless you can substantiate the need for a non-standard size. Indexes and LOB storage are indeed the primary use cases for uses non-standard block sizes for one or more tablespaces. Don't forget that you need to allocate the appropriate buffer cache.

  • Vault size vs APerture library size and related questions

    My aperture library is 50GB for some 65,000 referenced pictures...how does this compare with others? To me, it seems a bit big.
    Also odd. The vault backup of my libarary is 9.1GB ONLY! How come?
    I think that all of my pictures are referenced.....is there an easy way to check?
    If I make a new fresh library and restore from the vault, what will I loose, if anything? Will I need to reconnect pictures or anything?

    that seems about right to me. what's taking up space are previews and thumbnails. afaik, the vault doesn't hold any of those, only the database, albums, projects and configuration files.
    if you restore from a vault, all the previews and thumbnails have to be rebuilt. you can save a little space that way, because the thumbnail files don't shrink when you erase photos or move them to another project, but personally i don't think it's worth the time and effort.
    j

  • Why Are Lightroom File Sizes Smaller Than Elements Equivalents?

    I have been struggling to get good quality thumbnail sized images at small enough file sizes for a website. The only problem is that the versions I have done through Lightroom via the Web Module using the Flash template, will only allow a maximum width size of 191 pixels, whereas I'm looking to achieve 250 pixels wide. Doing it through Elements image resize box gets me the size I want, but for a decent quality, the file size is much larger. 
    Out of curiosity and for comparison, I made the Elements versions the same dimensions as the Lightroom ones. In order for the file sizes of the Elements ones to come even close and yet not as small as the Lightroom versions, I had to reduce the Jpeg quality to zero. This rendered them unusable.
    I can't understand why two related applications doing exactly the same thing can differ so wildly. Can someone tell me what is going on?

    Hmmm??
    Not To Sure??
    But I will try to find out..
    Keep you posted about that.
    Phillip

  • How to get a custom screen capture size smaller than my slide size

    Hi,
    I'm trying to capture a fixed sized screen on my computer (a softphone) for use in a youtube hd size format training video. I can't seem to figure out how to customize the size of my screen capture so it fits only around the phone and leaves me blank space on my slides. Any ideas?
    Thanks!
    Nikkie

    Hi there
    This should be simple. From Captivate, when you set it up to record you simply define an area there.
    Or are you possibly saying you cannot consistently get a size set so that you can record many different projects perhaps over several days? If that's the case, perhaps you need to investigate using something like the freeware Sizer utility to configure things a bit.
    Click here to visit the Sizer page
    Cheers... Rick

  • Published size smaller than planned

    Hi:
    I have been labouring with an animated cartoon Christmas card
    (my first attempt at using Flash). Thanks to help from David
    Stiller I have succeeded in getting it to work (save for moving the
    background layer to line up with the animation).
    I tried a test publish using default settings and it appears
    to be about 200 pixels across when my document was set at 803 X
    1086 pixels. Why is that? How do I get it to publish in the size I
    want?
    Thank you all!
    Tansle

    Never mind - I see where I can change it!! (Thought those
    numbers in the lower left of the Property inspector were grid
    parameters - but they are also size parameters.)

Maybe you are looking for

  • HT201412 iPhone 4S text alerts stop working

    I've have iOS 6 for months. Out of the blue my text alerts stopped working. I've rebooted a few times to no avail. All settings look right. And everything else seems to be working proper.

  • Tables for Campaign in marketing

    Hi, Has anybody got a list of tables for CRM Marketing ? We are especially looking for a table containing the territory id within a campaign and another one for identifying the hierarchy level of marketing project elements. Thanks, Tunde and Damaris

  • Automatically transfer pictures from iPhone to mac/icloud

    can you transfer pictures from my iPhone to my mac or iCloud automatically and automatically delete them as well on the iPhone to make space for other stuff?

  • Your registration(s) could not be completed due to server error

    I am getting this message when I try to register my downloaded Java 1.7 SDK. When completing the download originally, the registration process was aborted while I was reobtaining my username and resetting my password. Now when I go into C:\Program Fi

  • Dynamic Time Series with Planning connection?

    Hi guys, I have built some reports in HFR, with a connection to a Planning application (the architect requested so). But the only way to get the YTD function properly working is using an Essbase connection (I got an error with the Planning connection