Do you perhaps have an idea whether it would be possible to combine the individual galleries, each containing around 7,000 images, into one large gallery? Or would a gallery with that many thousands of images eventually become too slow?
If you have dozens of these albums, you can still combine them into one single album, but some functions require loading the whole album tree (a.k.a. the database).
The following functions require the whole tree:
- Search
- Tag cloud search
- New images
- NewImages.htt custom page
All of these load the whole database only when the function starts. The NewImages.htt custom page gathers the new images during "Make album". So even if the album is large, the page loads quickly.
Still, it might take several seconds to load a 10 MB database when needed. Here's an estimate of how long it might take. An average image adds 0.6-1 kB of data, depending on custom caption templates, the number of keywords, and whether certain features are used, e.g., metadata.
Image Count File Size Desktop (500 Mbps) 5G (150 Mbps) 4G (30 Mbps)
1,000 0.8 MB ~0.02 sec ~0.06 sec ~0.26 sec
10,000 8 MB ~0.13 sec ~0.45 sec ~2.18 sec
100,000 80 MB ~1.28 sec ~4.28 sec ~21.38 sec
And these are the best-case figures. I'd say the numbers above 10 seconds are problematic. When you go over 50,000 images, you'll hit that limit on 4G mobiles.
The other option is using Web locations; that is, you use it the usual way and add the uploaded album's URL to the "master" album. In that case, the functionality mentioned above will not work. The shopping cart and feedback can collect items only from the actual album.
The last option is using a server-based album software instead of jAlbum. But this would mean starting from scratch.
jAlbum creates albums that run on the visitor's computer. This has several advantages, but also has limits. I'd say if someone wants an album with more than ~100,000 pictures and a site-wide shopping cart and search, a local-based solution isn't the best choice.
Edited by: Laza on 17 Sep 2026, 08:39
