Lightroom Classic: Consumes all of my Mac resources when syncing to a large cloud inventory

  • 2
  • Problem
  • Updated 10 months ago
  • (Edited)
I migrated an inventory of ~17,000 full size images to the cloud using Lightroom CC.  The migration process took about 8 hours with my high speed cable modem <30Mbps upload.  I verified my upload and down load speed via speedtest.net @ 26.8Mbps upload and 290Mbps download.
Next I attempted to sync my master catalog (the same one that was migrated) to Lightroom Mobile using LightroomCC.  The process ran for 4-6 hours (remember download is 10 times faster than upload) until I got a warning from my MacOS that I was running out of resources.  The Activity Monitor showed the Lightroom Classic app had consumed 50GB of memory (I have only 32GB of RAM) Two apps were listed as not responding.  They were the Lightroom app and an Adobe Lightroom Helper app.   I was forced to kill the Lightroom app.  I then deleted the "lrcat.lock" file but not the ".lrcat-shm" or the "lrcat.wal".   After rebooting my system, I restarted Lightroom Classic and noticed that only about 900 of the 17,000 images had been sync'd.  I restarted syncing and the same situation developed with Lightroom consuming about 50GB of memory and slowing the system.
My questions are has this been reported and in testing the LR Classic app before it was released, did you test with real world data examples or only a token images inventory?
Photo of Cletus Lee

Cletus Lee

  • 88 Posts
  • 22 Reply Likes
  • I am feeling like Adobe really does not listen to their customer base This LR7 fiasco could have been prevented and Adobe apparently learned nothing from the horrible problems that happened with the premature release of LR6/LRCC2015

Posted 11 months ago

  • 2
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 285 Posts
  • 52 Reply Likes
I’m confused by your issue. You uploaded the photos so you could change over to Lightroom CC, correct? Then why do you mention Lightroom Classic performance at the end of your question, since you’re not using it? PS-use Memory Clean before doing that again (or just reboot with nothing launching).
Photo of Cletus Lee

Cletus Lee

  • 88 Posts
  • 22 Reply Likes
I uploaded my catalog from Lightroom Classic so that it would be available to my mobile computer (i.e. laptop) and mobile devices like an iPhone. 
I need to sync any changes made on images in the cloud back to my master catalog.  It is Lightroom Classic that is consuming all of my available memory during the sync.   I will be using both LRCC on my laptop and Lightroom Classic on my Desktop.  The only way to get originals to the cloud is to migrate my Lightroom Catalog using LRCC on my desktop. Migrating the catalog is not the issue.  Syncing my catalog to the cloud is the problem with runaway memory. 
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 285 Posts
  • 52 Reply Likes
PPS- no one with 17,000 images should be using Lightroom CC right now! Stick with LR Classic.
Photo of Cletus Lee

Cletus Lee

  • 88 Posts
  • 22 Reply Likes
If Adobe is selling 1TB of cloud storage for Lightroom, then they expect it to handle at least 17000 images.  That 17,000 image inventory only consumes about 350GB of my cloud storage.   I am quite aware of the limitations of LRCC  It is after all version 1.0
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 285 Posts
  • 52 Reply Likes
And you should expect Adobe backend servers to suck (they always have).
Photo of Shannon Hobbs

Shannon Hobbs

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I agree! This feels like a beta launch that should not have happened. And a solution to a problem that does not exist. Adobe uses Amazon servers to store our data, but if you are an Amazon prime member you get unlimited storage of photos. This new app is definitely not functional for a professional or prolific photographer, and for hobbyists ...offers nothing unique and yet comes at significant cost. It seems to me the business model of this app is to make money off of web storage vs. providing some unique functionality. Does not make good business sense to charge for what is already free elsewhere. If they really wanted to make an opportunity work here, they would have launched it in coordination with Amazon, not charged for storage, but added robust synchronization features with their other products for subscribers. In other words, used this as an entry point to their suite (like their other mobile apps) that would attract new customers.
Photo of Cletus Lee

Cletus Lee

  • 88 Posts
  • 22 Reply Likes
Adobe's charge for cloud Storage is the same as Apple's iCloud, Google Drive and Dropbox plans,   Only Microsoft's One drive offers a lower cost for the 1st Terabyte. 
Photo of Shannon Hobbs

Shannon Hobbs

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
My point was that they should have taken advantage of the business opportunity with Amazon (since they are already using Amazon for their web services to store all of our photos on Amazon servers...but maybe you guys did not realize that). If they had offered a special rate for Amazon prime customers, they would have expanded their entry level customer base immensely. Especially now with trying to sell individual app subscriptions.
Photo of Nanda Muhammad

Nanda Muhammad

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have the same problem. Is anyone from Adobe reading this?