Faster search

[sven_1968]

When I worked with wincommander and I searched for a mp 3 song, the first time it had to search the drive and took a little bit long, but if I had to search again for another song it was very fast since I think it saved the index or something. Now I use total Total Commander and everytime when I use the search (alt + F7) it has to search the whole drive, so it doesn't save the index (??). Is ther an option that this will go faster?

[petermad]

Increase your system cache.

[Lefteous]

If anything neeeds improved than the seach function. I added an article to our wiki:
http://www.ghisler.ch/wiki/index.php/Faster_search

[petermad]

2Lefteous
Questions:

How is the search database aware of files/folders being copied/moved/deleted by other programs than TC?

If the database is dynamically updated while working with TC, how will that influence the speed of copying/moving/deleting files.

Or is the database only supposed to be manually updated on demand?

[Lefteous]

2petermad
Maybe I quote from the article:

Locates' database is updated manually or can be updated at a specific point of time. This should also be applied to TCs' fast search.

Of course an additional update service could be provided - step by step. Anyway it's a remote future feature.

[icfu]

Excellent Wiki article and still one my high priority wishes for TC.

Icfu

[petermad]

So, what's the benefit? I guess in order to update the database the whole file system has to be traversed anyway. Why is that faster than when TC searches the whole system?

I can only see a benefit if you have to do a series of searches right after each other with no changes to the files in between. For occasional searches it looks as if I have to update the database first anyway. Are that correct conclusions?

[Lefteous]

2petermad
Well given the case that the database is not up to date (maybe last update using the task scheduler last week) you'll find all find not changed/added before this database update. All recent files can still be found using the "live" search. Please consider I don't request to replace the current search.
These are just my practical experiences from using both Locate32 and the TC search.
I hope the huge benefit is clear now - if not try Locate32 or a desktop search.

[icfu]

I can only see a benefit if you have to do a series of searches right after each other with no changes to the files in between.

Bingo! This is also the reason for this thread.

For occasional searches it looks as if I have to update the database first anyway. Are that correct conclusions?

You get the most out of Locate if you let it autoupdate itself (it has several options for that), otherwise if you are right depends on the data you want to search. If you want to search your MP3s or vids, you probably know if something has been added or not lately...

Locate can be integrated quite nicely with TC, so there's no reason to not give it a try.

Icfu

[van Dusen]

2petermad

In particular index based search is useful for
* offline volumes (external USB drives, which are currently not plugged or turned off)
* netshares (slow servers etc.)

Locate32 labels offline or obsolete entries, so that entries, wich are not up to date, can be easy identified.

Even if Locate32's autoupdate feature is turned off, it takes just a few minutes to update the database(s) for several sources (local and remote (net) drives) on demand... even when you perform an update only once a week.

Give Locate32 a try.. I am virtually certain, that you will support this feature request for TC afterwards

[TychoBarfy]

How is a simple file/folder search (not the content of a file) performed by TC?
Via search in cached MFT or FAT entries?
Excuse me, if this is a stupid question?

[jjk]

How is the search database aware of files/folders being copied/moved/deleted by other programs than TC?

I use FileTracer since 4 years. FT updates its files indexevery time a file is deleted/moved/created. Unfortunately FT is no longer enhanced and it costs $24. But it is very efficient and I use it every day.
Pros :
- very fast because index always updated
- little footprint
Cons :
- when a disk (eg USB) letter changes, you have to re-index it.
- network disks are not indexed
- no more evolution
- not interfaced with TC (a pity for all us)
Try it : it seems to me that even if you don't register, it runs but without some not essential functionalities. But because I bought it, I don't remember well.

Anyway, I support Lefteous' wishes.

JJK

[majkinetor !]

This is definitely most important thing missing in TC. I would like too see this more than anything else, far more then any other thing in TC7.

2petermad
You can update db on dailiy basis at night, so you have the fresh copy always.

I saw locate in one conversation between gbo and icfu and started to use it. I like this progy very much althouh I don't like the fact that it needs to be updated.

Much better solution for Locate update is File System Filter Driver that will update database on the fly. I wonder why nobody ever did it (by my knowledge). So, you trade a little of performance for instant search. Such driver is present in File Monitor by SysInternals crew for instance. The source can also be found. I wanted to create this in QuickSilver port but couldn't find anybody to help me....

[SanskritFritz]

2majkinetor !

Much better solution for Locate update is File System Filter Driver that will update database on the fly. I wonder why nobody ever did it (by my knowledge).

I think the post prior to yours is introducing one like this.

I like this progy very much althouh I don't like the fact that it needs to be updated.

What do you mean? There is no mandatory update for this program! ?

[majkinetor !]

Concentrate