Suggestion: Please, please get rid of calculated time for Indexing

Page 1 of 1 (17 items)
This post has 16 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 24852
Forum MVP
Dave Hooton | Forum Activity | Posted: Thu, Jun 17 2010 7:45 AM | Locked

Nobody likes or trusts the estimates the Indexer uses and it does create a lot of anxiety in the minds of all users. the latest episode was starting L4 a few minutes ago only to see the dreaded Indexer icon with the message "Preparing your Library"  followed by "Logos Bible Software is indexing (calculating time remaining)". This what the log showed:-

2010-06-17 23:50:53.2343    6    Info    Program    1 resources in the Bible index need updating
2010-06-17 23:50:53.2343    6    Info    Program    (Timed) Indexing.
2010-06-17 23:50:53.2500    6    Info    Program    Waiting for library indexing to finish.
2010-06-17 23:50:53.2500    7    Info    BibleIndex    Checking 0 resources that may have changed since they were last indexed.
2010-06-17 23:50:53.2656    7    Info    BibleIndex    0 unindexed resources out of 138 indexable resources; supplemental index count is 1.
2010-06-17 23:52:55.4375    7    Info    WindowsIndexerProgress    Discounting progress by 0.25 because after these 0 documents, 1 more will follow.
2010-06-17 23:52:55.4531    9    Info    LibraryIndex    Checking 0 resources that may have changed since they were last indexed.
2010-06-17 23:52:55.4531    9    Info    LibraryIndex    0 unindexed resources out of 952 indexable resources; supplemental index count is 52.
2010-06-17 23:52:55.4531    7    Info    WindowsIndexerProgress    timingdata    summary 0 1 False True 0 0 0
2010-06-17 23:53:25.4375    10    Info    WindowsIndexerProgress    0.0000 = 0.25 * (0.00 * 0.00 + 1.00 * 0.00 + 0.00 * 0.00 + 0.00 * 1.00) after 0.5m
2010-06-17 23:53:55.4375    10    Info    WindowsIndexerProgress    0.0000 = 0.25 * (0.00 * 0.00 + 1.00 * 0.00 + 0.00 * 0.00 + 0.00 * 1.00) after 1.0m
2010-06-17 23:54:09.0781    6    Info    WindowsIndexerProgress    timingdata    summary 0 1 False True 0 0 0
2010-06-17 23:54:09.0781    6    Info    Program    (3m 15.8s) Indexing.

I calculate that the Windows Indexer timing took 3m 15s - ridiculous.

A couple of days earlier I had the same scenario as above with 1m 47.4s Indexing & Windows Indexer timing took about 1m 47s.

Both these on my laptop.

Dave
===

Windows & Android

Posts 4077
Melissa Snyder | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 8:43 AM | Locked

Suggestion submitted for consideration.

Posts 3661
Floyd Johnson | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 8:49 AM | Locked

I am not sure that Dave is correct in saying that nobody likes the estimates.  I DO!

I don't know if I am in the minority or not - but I appreciate the Index time remaining being displayed.  I know that the estimate is off - and the actual time is about 1/2 of that displayed, but I appreciate having it and being able to get some idea of how long I will need to wait for my system to be free again.

Maybe what needs to happen is for a better time estimating algorithm to be developed?  I can live with the current one, but improvements could be made.

But do not drop the estimated time from being displayed.

Blessings,
Floyd

Pastor-Patrick.blogspot.com

Posts 44
Bob Fuller | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 9:04 AM | Locked

I agree with Floyd. It may be wrong, but it's better than having no idea at all. It seems to me that it adjusts.

Anyway, I would like to see it stay there.

Posts 4077
Melissa Snyder | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 9:11 AM | Locked

Dissents noted, thanks. I've added the request to make calculations more accurate if possible.

Posts 3659
BillS | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 11:17 AM | Locked

Bob Fuller:
Anyway, I would like to see it stay there.

Yes +1

Although my feelings wouldn't be hurt with either a more accurate estimate or a replacement metric that told us anything accurate (resources left to process? etc.). Wink

Thanks for listening, & blessings to you all!

 

Grace & Peace,
Bill


Asus GF63 8RD, I-7 8850H, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 2TB HDD, NVIDIA GTX 1050Max
Samsung S9+, 64GB
Fire 10HD 64GB 7th Gen

Posts 1228
Ron | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 11:39 AM | Locked

BillS:
(resources left to process? etc.)

I agree...if the estimate can't be made more accurate, then this measurement would be significantly more useful than an inaccurate estimate of time.

Posts 18651
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 11:47 AM | Locked

For the record, even Windows Copy command is bad at estimating how much longer it is going to take. I'm waiting right now for a manual backup of an entire hard disk to complete. I simply selected the entire contents of the root folder on the drive and dragged and dropped to another drive.The progress message has been all over the map, from several hours left, down to 3 minutes left back up to several hours. The number of files left to copy keeps changing up and down, too. So all I know is I'm going to have to keep waiting. And next time I'm going to buy a standalone hard disk duplicator! Doing this via USB 2.0 is for the birds!!

Posts 3661
Floyd Johnson | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 11:56 AM | Locked

Rosie Perera:

For the record, even Windows Copy command is bad at estimating how much longer it is going to take.

Yep - which is part of the reason that the error found in the indexing estimate is of no problem to me.  I use it - make sure it is still running and making progress - and return to what I am doing.

Thanks for listening.

 

Blessings,
Floyd

Pastor-Patrick.blogspot.com

Posts 3163
Dominick Sela | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 12:02 PM | Locked

I like it and vote to keep it. Since you have to click on it to see the time remaining estimate, if it bugs you don't click and look at it!!!

It does get better as it gets closer to the end. I know how it works in my library. It appears to have a bigger estimate whern indexing some large files, then it gets smaller, then it smooths out.  I find it useful.

Posts 158
Fred | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 17 2010 6:14 PM | Locked

1.  Keep the calculated time left function.

2.  Optional - Improve the algorithm if possible.

The function is useful.

And, there is already too much "hidden from the user" file activity in L4 for my tastes.  [L3 (Long Live L3) is much better at letting the user know what is going on behind the scenes - when updating, for example.]  Taking this indexing notification function away from L4 would only hide more L4 info from the user.

Fred

Posts 24852
Forum MVP
Dave Hooton | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jun 18 2010 5:48 AM | Locked

Floyd Johnson:
But do not drop the estimated time from being displayed.

The calculation wastes too much time before the Indexer starts to do anything useful. It should be replaced with a meaningful metric based on resources indexed or remaining to be indexed.

Dave
===

Windows & Android

Posts 640
Jim | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jun 18 2010 10:57 AM | Locked

Bob Fuller:

I agree with Floyd. It may be wrong, but it's better than having no idea at all. It seems to me that it adjusts.

Anyway, I would like to see it stay there.

Yes

 

Have a great day,
jmac

Posts 3661
Floyd Johnson | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jun 18 2010 11:03 AM | Locked

Dave Hooton:

Floyd Johnson:
But do not drop the estimated time from being displayed.

The calculation wastes too much time before the Indexer starts to do anything useful. It should be replaced with a meaningful metric based on resources indexed or remaining to be indexed.

Most of us have asked for change in the algorithm - you merely said get rid of it.  If a new algorithm is not possible, then keep the current one.

 

Blessings,
Floyd

Pastor-Patrick.blogspot.com

Posts 24852
Forum MVP
Dave Hooton | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jun 18 2010 6:46 PM | Locked

Floyd Johnson:
Most of us have asked for change in the algorithm - you merely said get rid of it.  If a new algorithm is not possible, then keep the current one.

On a complete re-index the calculated time eventually goes down to a few minutes for the Bible index and then ramps up again for the much larger Library index.

The instances I quote here may be a bug as no indexing takes place, but it gives the warnings (with associated user apprehension!) on a normal start-up that an indexing session is underway ie. it wastes time calculating (what?) for an event that does not take place.

Dave
===

Windows & Android

Posts 2916
Forum MVP
Jacob Hantla | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jun 18 2010 8:11 PM | Locked

In my opinion it is nice to know the time remaining so i can decide whether or not I want to reboot or not or if I only have a few minutes left. I would hate not having a clue if there were 6 hours (even if that really meant anywhere between 2 and 10) or 5 minutes. 

Percent indexed though may be a better option as it would accomplish the same thing and not freak people out

Jacob Hantla
Pastor/Elder, Grace Bible Church
gbcaz.org

Posts 1367
JimTowler | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jun 18 2010 9:11 PM | Locked

I would be happy with something like:

783 of 1234 Resources Indexed (63%)

Estimated: 45 Minutes Remaining.

The first part is a FACT, and the 2nd is less important, but a useful clue. The logic can assume that all resources are the same size and just scale the elasped time by the portion completed. No need to add up all the actual file sizes and do it "exactly", even if that was possible, or valid.

Page 1 of 1 (17 items) | RSS