Display Directory Size

[BrokenUnusableAccount]

It's not about getting places quickly or having a hectic life. It's about user experience. Have a think about the implications of waiting half a second before the UI responds every time you highlight a large directory, or one that's on a slow network and might take 20 seconds or more (see twol's earlier post). Even if you're not interested in the size of the directory, it's still going to kick off a scan of the subdirectories and while that's going on you can't do anything while you're waiting. It becomes a barrier to getting to the items you're interested in and you'll probably press the arrow buttons a few times while you're waiting wondering what's going on, which will exacerbate the problem by kicking off more directory scans.

In an ideal implementation you wouldn't have to wait for it to scan and add up the sizes unless you wanted to, you would be able to moving the cursor around without waiting if you chose and the scanning would be interrupted before it completed.

But I am saying this with no real idea of how difficult this would be to do in the OpenViX UI.

[birdman]

You could the count of directories and total size (block count?) of files in each location, along with the percentage of that filesystem in use (or free).
That should be quick for all instances. But might be no more useful than the current display.

[simonc]

Which is bang on what we're getting

[ccs]

While you're on a roll, any chance of adding the programme description (of the earliest recording?) when highlighting a collection?

[simonc]

Ha, I vaguely remembered your request from March and started having a look yesterday. One question: should it actually show the description of the item that's bottom or maybe top of your chosen sort order?

[ccs]

Ha, I vaguely remembered your request from March and started having a look yesterday. One question: should it actually show the description of the item that's bottom or maybe top of your chosen sort order?

My sort order is always the default "by date" so my preference would be the bottom of that list.

I'd rather see the first episode description (the oldest) rather than the last episode (which is at the top), as it might contain spoilers.

[Joe_90]

Maybe the collection entry could also show the date of the oldest recording in the list? It currently shows 1st Jan 1970.

[simonc]

Maybe the collection entry could also show the date of the oldest recording in the list? It currently shows 1st Jan 1970.

Ah, yes. Not spotted that because my skin doesn't display that info.

Agreed that showing the oldest episode description is the safest in all cases.

[simonc]

Now that I look again, when selected, directories show 1st Jan 1970 as well. Lets keep things simple and not show a date for those or for collections.

I experimented with making the selecting of a collection show all the details (start time, durection, picon) of the oldest recording, but it was starting to get a bit misleading: it looked like you'd selected a recording. I'll stick with just the description and the total size of the collection.

[ccs]

Ah, yes. Not spotted that because my skin doesn't display that info.

Agreed that showing the oldest episode description is the safest in all cases.

Thanks for adding the feature, looking good in 5.5.014.008

[ccs]

Thanks for adding the feature, looking good in 5.5.014.008

Not sure how (MS Edge), but the g's in looking good have both lost the tail in my last post. Just quoting to see what happens.

EDIT: looks ok in the quote.

Changing the magnification up or down from 100% brings the tail back.

Post #33 does the same, the rest on this page are ok.

[Joe_90]

Now that I look again, when selected, directories show 1st Jan 1970 as well. Lets keep things simple and not show a date for those or for collections.

I experimented with making the selecting of a collection show all the details (start time, durection, picon) of the oldest recording, but it was starting to get a bit misleading: it looked like you'd selected a recording. I'll stick with just the description and the total size of the collection.

Thanks for that in 5.5 builds. Is it being ported to 5.4 or is it py3 only? I don't see any recent commits for directory/collections in the Dev branch.

[Huevos]

I think it is about time that we switch to the Py3 compatible branch for all builds.

[simonc]

Yes, this feature wouldn't work on Python 2; I used one of the new, faster, Python 3 directory scanning functions.

[Huevos]

Yes, this feature wouldn't work on Python 2; I used one of the new, faster, Python 3 directory scanning functions.

Does that mean we now have code in that branch that is not compatible with Py2? The plan was that branch would run on both so we could use it for both builds until we drop Py2 altogether.