Default sort

Have a suggestion for "Everything"? Please post it here.
Post Reply
Magritte
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:04 pm

Default sort

Post by Magritte » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:21 pm

It's a small thing but I wish I could specify the default sort column and/or have Everything remember the last sort. I usually prefer to have results sorted by path but I have to manually do this each time.

Also, I'd like the option to integrate folders and files in the same sort. That is, currently folders are always shown at the top, then files, and folders and files are sorted independently as 2 separate lists. This can be useful, but often I'd prefer that folders and files were sorted together as a single list.

Thanks!

David
Site Admin
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:42 am

Re: Default sort

Post by David » Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:10 pm

The latest alpha version does remember the last sort for some columns.
however, since sorting by path is CPU intensive, "Everything" reverts to sorting by name after searching.

Keeping the sort order for smaller results is on my "Things to do" list.

You might like to try the latest alpha "Everything" version 1.2.1.446a.
Sorting by both run history and recent changes mix folders and files together.
Otherwise "Everything" treats files and folders as two completely different objects, giving folders higher priority.
Mixing all files and folders together would require a lot of CPU.
I will consider an option to do this.

Magritte
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:04 pm

Re: Default sort

Post by Magritte » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:46 pm

Hi,

Actually, I am running version 1.2.1.446a.

So what do you mean by "CPU intensive"? As long as it's not using the CPU when sitting in the background but only when displaying or initially sorting the list I'm not sure I care how CPU intensive it is. If it can accelerate the process using multiple cores that would be even better. So I think it would be nice to have the option to mix folder and file lists for any sort type and to remember sort by path. It would be okay if these options were disabled by default and you had to explicitly enable them, at which point the program could give you a warning about CPU use and ask you to confirm that you really want to enable them... Another possible option is to have an optional full path (path+file/folder name) column. When you sort by that column the files and folders would be naturally combined.

Thanks!

David
Site Admin
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:42 am

Re: Default sort

Post by David » Fri Nov 20, 2009 11:41 pm

So what do you mean by "CPU intensive"?
It depends on the number of results.
Sorting one million files and folders by path will take about 20 seconds on a 3GHZ CPU.

Keeping the previous sort when there is only a small (customizable) number of results is on my "Things to do" list.

daspud
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:15 am

Re: Default sort

Post by daspud » Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:57 am

David wrote:Sorting one million files and folders by path will take about 20 seconds on a 3GHZ CPU.....
1,284,264 objects <10 seconds on my Core i5 2.66GHz. [gotta brag a little, just got it]. ;)

Boofo
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 7:37 am

Re: Default sort

Post by Boofo » Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:01 am

daspud wrote:
David wrote:Sorting one million files and folders by path will take about 20 seconds on a 3GHZ CPU.....
1,284,264 objects <10 seconds on my Core i5 2.66GHz. [gotta brag a little, just got it]. ;)
I wonder how it would do on an i7 2.66 GHZ. I got the chip, just waiting to afford the MB.

Post Reply