As part of my efforts to resolve that non-editable description field bug, I created a replacement production database starting from scratch. This was meant to replace the one that I had converted from 3.6. Same files, same categories, keywords, attributes, thesaurus, etc. The converted DB was 4.83Gb, the one started from scratch was 5.35Gb, or a little over 10% larger.
I was initially a little surprised by this, as I thought that they'd be reasonably close. I guess the difference is in the image thumbs which are in the DB, as I understand it. So converting the 3.6 thumbs gives me a smaller DB than creating them from scratch.
Is this to be expected?
Did you run a compact on both. The size difference may be from pre-allocated "grow" space. I really don't test such things so I'm just guessing.
I certainly did.
Quote from: Mario on May 29, 2014, 01:23:23 PM
The size difference may be from pre-allocated "grow" space.
Perhaps. You'd know better than I. I thought perhaps that V3.6 used more aggressive compression in creating the thumbs than V5, and the conversion just brings them across as is. It's not a big deal. I was just reporting an observation that took me by surprise.