Huge number of files
Moderators: white, Hacker, petermad, Stefan2
Huge number of files
Totalcommander is ekstremly slow when working with a huge number of files. Typicaly i have a directory with 30000+ files inn it, and it takes from 2-5 minutes to enter it.
Is there any workaround to this? Any other software i can use to work with this amount of files?
Is there any workaround to this? Any other software i can use to work with this amount of files?
This is probably not what you are looking for, but this plugin allow to separate files into folders. It would improve performance but I guess your files have to be in the same folder
Gil
Licence #17346
90% of coding is debugging. The other 10% is writing bugs.
Licence #17346
90% of coding is debugging. The other 10% is writing bugs.
devzero,
HTH
Roman
Try Configuration - Options - Display - Show symbols to the left of the filename - No symbols.Totalcommander is ekstremly slow when working with a huge number of files. Typicaly i have a directory with 30000+ files inn it, and it takes from 2-5 minutes to enter it.
Well, command line should be fast.Any other software i can use to work with this amount of files?
HTH
Roman
Mal angenommen, du drückst Strg+F, wählst die FTP-Verbindung (mit gespeichertem Passwort), klickst aber nicht auf Verbinden, sondern fällst tot um.
Ill test the plugin later today, if it can keep the speed up it would be a lifesaver.
I should probably have mentioned that commandline is mostly to slow also, i had a directory that i ran
dir /b > ../dir.txt
After running for 15 minnutes the txt file was 16mb and still running.
Doing a
del *.* /Q took about 10 minutes.
And no, i have no idea exactly how many files that directory contained.
I should probably have mentioned that commandline is mostly to slow also, i had a directory that i ran
dir /b > ../dir.txt
After running for 15 minnutes the txt file was 16mb and still running.
Doing a
del *.* /Q took about 10 minutes.
And no, i have no idea exactly how many files that directory contained.
1) It is slow everytime, if i could just wait while it opened the first time, then be able to work with the files normaly it would be ok. Problem is not only is it slow on first open, but somtimes it seems to "autorefresh" when i select it and takes another several minutes to do this.
2) Explorer is actually much worse.
This was tested on windows 2000 adv. server with ntfs file system and a fairly fast SCSI disk, altho i don't know exact spec's on the disk. The dir contains 38000 files and 30000 dirs.
2) Explorer is actually much worse.
This was tested on windows 2000 adv. server with ntfs file system and a fairly fast SCSI disk, altho i don't know exact spec's on the disk. The dir contains 38000 files and 30000 dirs.
2devzero
In main menu call Configuration/Change Settings Files directly.
In Wincmd.ini changed/add the following settinga:
Restart Total Commander after applying this settings.
Please add the cpu usage information.
Another idea:
Maybe you could use a filter like *.jpg if don't need to see all files at once.
OK to disable all possible types of refrehes do the following:It is slow everytime, if i could just wait while it opened the first time, then be able to work with the files normaly it would be ok. Problem is not only is it slow on first open, but somtimes it seems to "autorefresh" when i select it and takes another several minutes to do this.
In main menu call Configuration/Change Settings Files directly.
In Wincmd.ini changed/add the following settinga:
Code: Select all
NoReRead=ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ\
WatchDirs=0
Please add the cpu usage information.
After all it seems Total Commander is the fastest program of all.Explorer is actually much worse.
Ok that means we are not talking about 30000 but about 68000 objects in that particular directory.The dir contains 38000 files and 30000 dirs.
Another idea:
Maybe you could use a filter like *.jpg if don't need to see all files at once.
May be OT:
At this point, the speed of SpeedCommander could be quite interessting because (as far as I know) SC does not read all entries but only the amount of items which would be visible without scrolling. As soon you scroll the list, both names and icons are read. All non-visible items are empty, no icon, no text... (see: http://blog.speedproject.de/2005/10/26/verkuerzte-baumansicht/ (german blog entry))
TC does it different: Read all entries (all names), extract icons (if not disabled) only for those which are visible.
Correct me if i'm wrong...
Regards,
CoolWater
At this point, the speed of SpeedCommander could be quite interessting because (as far as I know) SC does not read all entries but only the amount of items which would be visible without scrolling. As soon you scroll the list, both names and icons are read. All non-visible items are empty, no icon, no text... (see: http://blog.speedproject.de/2005/10/26/verkuerzte-baumansicht/ (german blog entry))
TC does it different: Read all entries (all names), extract icons (if not disabled) only for those which are visible.
Correct me if i'm wrong...
Regards,
CoolWater
may be you should turn off your anti virus program for testing...devzero wrote:CPU usage is from 10 to 20% on total commander, other prosesses uses next to nothing. (when totcmd used 20%, total system load was about 22%) for the first few minnutes, last 30 sek totcmd used 50% (or 100% of one CPU as this system has 2 cpu's )
Now off to test speedcommander...
2devzero
This is a very interesting information. This sounds as if "the first minutes" are used to get the files and last 30 seconds to display them.CPU usage is from 10 to 20% on total commander, other prosesses uses next to nothing. (when totcmd used 20%, total system load was about 22%) for the first few minnutes, last 30 sek totcmd used 50% (or 100% of one CPU as this system has 2 cpu's