505
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by avidamoeba@lemmy.ca to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

I've been trying to upgrade from 10.10 to 10.11 for a while now, as the Android TV app keeps nagging me, and every attempt ended with impossibly long library scan times.

After some thorough investigation, it appeared that a Home Videos type collection causes unending scan (yet to be solved), but also that Jellyfin does a lot of writes to the config directory (either database or metadata or both). Mine's on spinning media part of a ZFS pool. I tried a few performance tuning options, such as testing the config dir with recordsize (similar to block size) of 4K, 8K, 64K, 128K and library scans fell from 30-40 minutes down to 8-13min with 4K-64K. The ZFS tuning wiki suggest 64K recordsize with LZ4 compression for SQLite workloads such as Jellyfin. That seems to work as well as 4K and 8K but likely is faster when reading thumbnails and such.

Note that upgrading to 12-rc3, which is supposed to speed up library scans did not improve scan times for me. Optimizing config/database write speed did. I cross-checked the culprit by experimenting with moving the config dir to NVMe and RAM. Both of those got the scan times down to 8-9 minutes compared to the optimized spinning media's 12-13.

So if you had upgraded (or about to) to 10.11 your library scans are (about to get) dog slow and your Jellyfin's config dir resides on spinning media, optimize its write performance for SQLite.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old

I run the DB on the SSD and media on the hdds and haven't had any issues, but I don't have a huge library though. However, things are generally speedy. I thought the higher record sizes were recommended for media, not the DB? but if it worked for you, that's good

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago

64K is generally small recordsize. For media they recommend 1M. My db was sitting on the default 128K recordsize and perforned fine on 10.10. It doesn't matter much for reads because ZFS keeps it in RAM and if it gets evicted it goes into SSD cache (l2arc). But for writes the cache wouldn't help unless I disable sync which risks data loss. I don't think 10.10 did much writes during lib scan so write perf only mattered when something changed.

[-] czl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 132 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Isn’t it ironic that you post this meme along with complex instructions to fixing a problem in jellyfin?

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 54 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

With great power come great .. uuh .. :D

Also the meme is just bait so you read abt the problem and see if you need to solve it for your setup.

[-] Poxlox@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

Excellent bait

[-] victorz@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (47 replies)
[-] Carol2852@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

If you use folders a lot, the library will get faster with v12 https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/issues/15141

OP said this didn’t improve their situation though.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Not sure if this is the problem I was hitting with my Home Videos library type. It's got directories with YouTube videos. I tried re-adding it in 12-rc3, which was released a month after the nightly mentioned in the issue thread. Still couldn't complete. I ended up re-adding the media as Shows library. Works okay with the directory structure I have.

The write performance was recorded without the problematic library (deleted).

I've had initial scans take hours and scans afterwards usually also take some minutes. Why do you think that is an unreasonable amount of time to check all entries for updated metadata?

unending != 40 minutes.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 3 points 23 hours ago

That would be reasonable. I did repeated rescans and only counted subsequent rescans. For me the initial scan after upgrade took a bit more but not hours. Subsequent scans took less. E.g. 20min -> 13min for write-optimized filesystem. So that's reasonable, although 10.10 was way faster. Library scans are expected to get faster in 13 according to some Github threads I read.

When I had the broken Home Videos library I waited 3 days for the initial scan to complete and it did not. Repeated rescans did not seem to complete although I didn't wait 3 days for them. I'm not taking into account those scan times. Something was wrong with this library type on 10.11 and/or my media. Worked fine on 10.10.

[-] Strit@lemmy.linuxuserspace.show 2 points 23 hours ago

Fair. I have never had a Home Video library, so I don't know how those are scanned or what they are looking for other than embedded metadata. But yes, sounds like that library type has some issues.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2026
505 points (97.0% liked)

Selfhosted

61070 readers
1039 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS