global (overall) progress in Background transfer manager

Here you can propose new features, make suggestions etc.

Moderators: Hacker, petermad, Stefan2, white

Post Reply
laburj2
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 2008-12-22, 08:49 UTC
Location: Russia

global (overall) progress in Background transfer manager

Post by *laburj2 »

Hi, I would really welcome the possibility to see also overall progress in Background transfer manager.
thank you!
User avatar
Hacker
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 13142
Joined: 2003-02-06, 14:56 UTC
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia

Post by *Hacker »

Hello laburj2,
How would you solve the long delay to calculate total size of the files / directories before starting an FTP transfer?

Roman
Mal angenommen, du drückst Strg+F, wählst die FTP-Verbindung (mit gespeichertem Passwort), klickst aber nicht auf Verbinden, sondern fällst tot um.
User avatar
Samuel
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 1930
Joined: 2003-08-29, 15:44 UTC
Location: Germany, Brandenburg an der Havel
Contact:

Post by *Samuel »

Just divide it:
There are 4 folders to copy -> each gets 25%
the first folder has 3 subfolders and 2 files in it. Each item gets 5% of overall progress.

I would prefer a nonuniform overall progress bar over none at all. (Also because in Win 7 its visible if TC is in background)
User avatar
Hacker
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 13142
Joined: 2003-02-06, 14:56 UTC
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia

Post by *Hacker »

Samuel,
So you would simply suggest the number of items in the BTM as the measure for the second progress bar, right?

Roman
Mal angenommen, du drückst Strg+F, wählst die FTP-Verbindung (mit gespeichertem Passwort), klickst aber nicht auf Verbinden, sondern fällst tot um.
User avatar
Samuel
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 1930
Joined: 2003-08-29, 15:44 UTC
Location: Germany, Brandenburg an der Havel
Contact:

Post by *Samuel »

Yes if the size was not counted. I would really like to see that implemented.

Some advanced approach like here: http://www.ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=23450 (A) would be great too.
User avatar
sqa_wizard
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 3893
Joined: 2003-02-06, 11:41 UTC
Location: Germany

Post by *sqa_wizard »

Well, I don't see any benefit on just counting the files.
This may work if all files are about the same size, but usually the sizes are different.

Having 19 files with small sizes and 1 is an DVD iso file, I got 95% progress after 15 seconds and it will last another hour or even more for the last 5%.
No valuable info.

Furthermore I have to wait a long time for counting files, which is very time consuming, even on the local file system (as a lot of threads here in the forum proof)
On a FTP server it is even woth (a CWD and a LIST command for each folder).
Just another time delay

All in all I have to wait a long time before the copy of the first file is done and don't have a reliable progress info.
=> no benefit at all, at least for me
#5767 Personal license
User avatar
Samuel
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 1930
Joined: 2003-08-29, 15:44 UTC
Location: Germany, Brandenburg an der Havel
Contact:

Post by *Samuel »

My point is that I often want to know: Does it still copy or is it finished?

I simplified my suggestion here. Look in the other thread. There should be a slightly better heuristic for it.
Post Reply