photoanalysisd running for over a week now on Network Attached Storage photo library

You will always have issues with a library on an unsupported device. A NAS is not a suitable location. The Library needs to be on a disk formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled) or afps and not in a networked location.

You risk significant dataloss.

However, I am finding photoanalysisd constantly running and creating all kinds of sqlite files on these archived libraries,

Which is exactly the kind of thing that happens when the library is on an unsupported device. The solution is simple: move the libraries to a supported location, and hope they haven't been damaged already.

ksaro1 wrote:

FWIW - if anyone else has a similar issue, I've fixed this. Apple Photos seems to assume any directory named Photos Library.photoslibrary is a Photos Library and is automatically scanned by photoanalysed. By simply renaming this library photoanalysed ignores this directory.

In the future if I'm needing to access the photos I'll just rename this library back to the original name Photos Library.photoslibrary.

I believe that this would be a temporary band-aid because once you start using the renamed library, it is recognized again and photoanalysed will start working on it again. I noticed this because I have multiple such Photos Libraries with various file names. I found that that background process eventually finishes with Photos Libraries on a directly connected drive. However as Yer Man already pointed out, on a NAS device it will be much slower (instead of taking hours or a day or two it could take weeks or even months) and that is not a safe location because it is unsupported by such libraries and with some future MacOS update or upgrade it could result in data loss. Not sure why photoanalysed is a concern for you since it runs in the background and uses few resources (which is one reason it may take a long time on a large library).

and that is not a safe location because it is unsupported by such libraries and with some future MacOS update or upgrade it could result in data loss.

As Leonie points out, the risk is not an update but rather that libraries on unsupported locations silently degrade over time. The nature and extent of the degradation is not visible unless you happen to click on an image that's already affected. But in a situation where a library is not often used then the first sign you get is when it won't open. At heart, a NAS is a headless computer usually running a stripped down version of Linux. So, you're hosting a Mac database on a Linux computer, and for some reason folks expect that to work when they wouldn't expect one hosted on a Windows computer to work, for some reason. Apple say it's not wise and risks dataloss, but hey ho. Folks do what they want to do.

That's an interesting discovery, and thanks for reporting it. That said, I would point out to other users, that the location of those libraries mean they are at severe risk of dataloss.