Jason Carr

Thank you @ItchyRobot, good to hear. For anyone in this thread who's having issues with performance, RAM, or crashes, keep in mind that issues like those are almost always caused by some kind of outside influence, be it bad drivers, being out of date on updates (or even running untested bleeding edge Windows updates), or some kind of poorly written application running in the background. And of course if your system isn't stable because of over-clocking, that can be an issue as well. Unfortunately we've also seen lots of corrupt Windows, .NET Framework, or DirectX installs that can do all kinds of other crazy things and cause similar issues. So it's always worth repairing Windows, looking for driver updates, making sure you're up to date on Windows updates, closing background applications, etc.

Can you explain exactly what is happening every single time (I assume you're saying that the Options screen is taking a long time to load)? Are you timing it? How long is it taking? Does it take a long time again if you close it out and re-open it? Are you seeing poor performance elsewhere in LaunchBox? Try closing everything you have running in the background, especially any anti-virus or security apps, and see if that makes any difference.

By chance, are you using Windows Media Player for your video playback engine in LaunchBox? Other than that, I really have no idea why your system would be holding onto all that RAM. I've tested going through and clicking through game after and game and the RAM never goes above 2 gigs. So to figure that out, we'd have to dive in and test a bunch of things. The first thing would be to get your OS and system specs.

This does look to be caused by a flaky network or Internet connection. It could have just been a temporary issue though. As far as I'm aware, we have not had any issues with the LaunchBox Games Database.

@legolas119 Tools > Create Missing Arcade/MAME Playlists

Are you able to reproduce this every time? Have you tried rebooting? In the past, performance issues like this have typically been caused by some other app on your system creating a conflict.

Do you mean that you can't bind the home button? To be honest, we probably won't be adding support for proprietary buttons on third-party controllers that should just be adopting already-existing functionality instead of reinventing the wheel.

10.15 is still the latest version, as we're working on a big feature before the first 10.16 beta. RAM usage should not be that high, no, but unfortunately it could be caused by any number of things, including faulty drivers, a Windows bug, or who knows what else. If you're seeing RAM usage upwards of 8 gigs (that keeps growing), please let me know what you're doing in LaunchBox that is causing the RAM to grow. I've done some testing on my systems though and I'm not seeing any issues like that, so it's probably somehow system-specific.

Yes, would could add that, but it wouldn't really be a good solution. Previously, it's been discussed to do that on the games database; that way at least it updates it for everyone. But I haven't jumped on any of that yet.

Most often when this happens it's because LaunchBox is detecting duplicate games already in your collection for various reasons. If you change the platform, they're no longer identified as duplicates. If you want to force it, you should be able to just check the box to force importing duplicates.

I've banned that user. Regardless, the moderation system is doing its job, so we don't need to worry about things getting "messed up quicky".

You do not have to delete the entire platform, only the games. You can just delete the games by selecting them all and pressing the Del key. The size of the collection affects the import speed because of duplicate/combining checks and other related things. I'm sure there are optimizations that could be made though. I'll keep that in mind; might be able to improve it at some point here.

That is how it should be behaving, yes. That's what I see.

I'd have to record one. I'm in the middle of a bunch of things though so unfortunately I can't do that right now. To be honest, I'm not *that* worried about this issue either way.

The weird thing is that I'm not seeing that difference at all. Maybe on your system for some reason it's repopulating while the slider is being moved? I can't replicate that though, so I don't really know why that would be.

So it looks like that theme has been discontinued and is no longer being supported. But I still don't see any issues with using the slider on it. It's smooth as butter for me, both with the arrow keys and with dragging the slider. It doesn't fully finish and repopulate until you stop moving the slider.

Ah, okay. Perhaps there is an issue with that theme. I'll download it and try it out.

That is not how it is working in my testing. Again, what theme are you running? I wonder if we have an issue there with some themes or something.

It's behaving exactly the same for me. What theme are you using?

Responded in the thread. That only happens when the system is choking. Regardless though, zooming isn't all that common of an operation, and you can easily just drag the slider to whatever you want it to be, which isn't slow at all. Should be quick and easy to drag it to the general place you want it, and then use the arrow keys for precision.

This is a known issue. Unfortunately there aren't many good solutions for it currently. The retro achievements guys are working on an updated API which should help, but currently the name was the only piece of information provided that we could use to match them up.

That doesn't seem right, since I can't even get a full set to import in 30 seconds on an SSD and an i9 9900K.

Yeah, should be that easy.

I just did some performance testing with the MAME full-set importer, without downloading any media. Results: Full set import with metadata, default filters: 2 minutes Full set import without metadata, default filters: < 1 minute Full set import with metadata, no filters: 22 minutes Full set import without metadata, no filters: 2 minutes It looks like the longer times are just coming from the filters (along with populating the metadata). If you don't filter anything out, you end up with 41,763 games/apps vs. only 6,627 games/apps, so that's a huge difference. Obviously I'm getting much faster times than 2 hours, but that may just be due to the fact that I'm running an i9 9900K. It also could be affected by the size of the existing collection.