XYplorer Beta Club

I'm currently using TrackerV3 V. 4.00.0143.

I have to access to network folders which can be relatively huge.
The display of the folders is already slower than the standard explorer file manager. A derived problem occurs with this first issue :
- Click in the treeview to display a network folder.
- During the folder access/refresh, click to an another network folder, the folder displayed is the previous accessed folder.

If this doesn't work the first time, you can do many clicks quickly to display many folders. It can be reproduce each time on my machine.

Cannot reproduce it but then I don't have huge network folders... so thanks for your observation, but I can't do anything about it.

Oswald wrote:I have to access to network folders which can be relatively huge.
The display of the folders is already slower than the standard explorer file manager.

Yep, I have the same problem with network drives...and the one I'm accessing doesn't have a huge amount of files/folders at any given level, so I don't know why scanning the selected folder takes so long. Windows Explorer handles it with the same speed as browsing my local hard drive.

(http://www.trackerv3.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=318)

Maybe it depends on the type of the network because not every user seems to have this problem. What's your network?

admin wrote:Maybe it depends on the type of the network because not every user seems to have this problem. What's your network?

On the Windows box I connect to, Tracker takes longer than Windows Explorer to list the directories and contents, but it's the drive I have mapped to a Linux box that Tracker takes way longer to list the contents of than Windows Explorer. Windows Explorer takes the same amount of time to list the contents of the Linux drive as it does a Windows network drive.

As I mentioned elsewhere in this forum its hard for me to develop optimal code for all the different network types since I only have one very simple 2-computer network here. I'm surprised about the performance differences you report since I use pretty standard network APIs for resolving the network tree, and standard file system APIs for listing the contents. I have no idea from the top of my head where there could be a bottleneck, and I cannot test it to find out.
An unpleasant situation, which we will have to endure (or take another file manager ).

Well, I guess you'll have to just go out and buy 4 or 5 computers and put different operating systems on them for testing. Then you should go back and optimize the way you scan directories and add the items to the treeview and listview controls...because we all know your code isn't optimized at all.

Yikes, sometimes the easiest solution is just too close to see it!