Related question:
How are the results sorted at all?
I have this attached example:
The results are sorted here by Run count, and all of the items in the table have nothing in the Run Count [meaning 0, they have never been run from everything].
How are the PDFs in the bottom, but their containing directory in the top?
This isn't even alphabetical. Any tips?
Thanks!
How are the results sorted at all?
Re: How are the results sorted at all?
Moved from Priority | Order | Sort of certain folders over random results.
Sorting by run count will sort in descending order first.
If the run count is the same, results are then sorted by name descending.
Files and folders are separate lists.
Folders are shown at the top when sorting by run count descending.
To mix file and folder results:
From the View menu, under the Sort By submenu, check Mix files and folders.
However, this option is only available when sorting by name, path, size or date modified.
I'll look into making Everything sort by name ascending when sorting by run count descending and the run count is the same.
(This is what Everything 1.4 does)
Sorting by run count will sort in descending order first.
If the run count is the same, results are then sorted by name descending.
Files and folders are separate lists.
Folders are shown at the top when sorting by run count descending.
To mix file and folder results:
From the View menu, under the Sort By submenu, check Mix files and folders.
However, this option is only available when sorting by name, path, size or date modified.
I'll look into making Everything sort by name ascending when sorting by run count descending and the run count is the same.
(This is what Everything 1.4 does)
Re: How are the results sorted at all?
Thanks.
I wonder if the way 1.4 does it is better. I think best would be to have the option to sort by a secondary selected parameter, [probably not an obvious development though] for example `last changed`.
Is there something i am missing with having separate lists for files and folders, I'm not sure why it is like that.
What is the benefit?
In my case, I am indexing the whole volume, [and there is no option to not index folders], so folders are actually the same list, right?
I wonder if the way 1.4 does it is better. I think best would be to have the option to sort by a secondary selected parameter, [probably not an obvious development though] for example `last changed`.
Is there something i am missing with having separate lists for files and folders, I'm not sure why it is like that.
What is the benefit?
In my case, I am indexing the whole volume, [and there is no option to not index folders], so folders are actually the same list, right?
Re: How are the results sorted at all?
Files and folders are separate databases in Everything.
Using separate database makes it faster to search files only / folders only.
Everything doesn't need to store an "item type", reducing the database size.
Windows Explorer separates files / folders.
Some minor reasons:What is the benefit?
Using separate database makes it faster to search files only / folders only.
Everything doesn't need to store an "item type", reducing the database size.
Windows Explorer separates files / folders.
Please try the folders only filter:so folders are actually the same list, right?
- From the Search menu, check Folders.
- From the Search menu, click Add to filters...
- Change the Name to: Files only
- Change the Search to: file:
- Click OK.
Re: How are the results sorted at all?
Thanks so much.
I was still a bit confused and couldnt make sense of it at first.
After finding this post viewtopic.php?p=26796#p26796, i got it.
Also found a few more amazing tools in this forum, and became aware of even more power of everything. :BLESS:
I was still a bit confused and couldnt make sense of it at first.
After finding this post viewtopic.php?p=26796#p26796, i got it.
Also found a few more amazing tools in this forum, and became aware of even more power of everything. :BLESS:
Re: How are the results sorted at all?
Everything 1.5.0.1344a will now sort by Name ascending when the run count is not set or matching.