Need Fast Desktop File Search That Doesw NOT use Indexing

March 29, 2007 6:55 PM

I'm looking for a desktop file search tool that does NOT use indexing (compacted database). I have used the file search that comes with Powerdesk Pro for years, however, I am taking this off my system to lighten the load. I've kept it only for the blazing fast file search. Now, I want to find a desktop file search that can replace the one from PD Pro, while using less resources. As we all know, the XP search is slow as molasses. Can anyone help? Again - no search tool that indexes files. Thanks in advance!
posted by Gerard Sorme to computers & internet (26 comments total)

You might want to specify your operating system.

If you're on linux, you'd be hard pressed to beat plain old command-line "find".
posted by chrisamiller at 7:11 PM on March 29, 2007

Hi chrisamiller. I meantioned that XP's search was slow as mollases. So, I'm using Windows XP. Thanks anyway!

-
posted by Gerard Sorme at 7:14 PM on March 29, 2007

And if you're on Windows, you can still use find by using the Win32 ports of Unix utilities, which includes the findutils package, which has 'find' inside.
posted by mikeyk at 7:16 PM on March 29, 2007

Thanks for the suggestion, but the download site is down. I'd really rather find a utility that is strictly Windows and is just a file-search. PowerDesk PRO was awesome, probably 10-20 times faster than Windows in scanning files for a match - it blazed. But, I can't just can't justify keeping the memory hogging app on my PC any longer for just the file search.

Any other suggestions are most welcome!

-
posted by Gerard Sorme at 7:27 PM on March 29, 2007

I don't really understand your desire for both speed and no indexing. It's only because the program creates an index that it can be fast. If it doesn't, it has to look at each file in entirety for each search, which equals slow searches. You can't have both.
posted by Rhomboid at 7:45 PM on March 29, 2007

Rhomboid has it - you're asking for the impossible. Indexing is the only real way to have fast searching. Can you at least elaborate on why you think having no index database is preferable? It sounds like you're just assuming it's a bad thing without understanding how such searching works.

Also, why are you signing all your posts with a hyphen? Reminds me of a certain Mr. Lokken from a while back.
posted by cyrusdogstar at 7:49 PM on March 29, 2007

3rding. Any search, without an index, is a linear scan. You need indexing, you just don't want crummy, obtrusive indexing. Google desktop does alright by me.
posted by chairface at 8:03 PM on March 29, 2007

Like Rhomboid and cyrusdogstar I'd first point out that indexing is what facilitates fast searches. All fast search tools will involve a large index file being stored somewhere on your hard drive. Mine is a couple of gigabytes. The memory (RAM) footprint varies from tool to tool.

Most desktop search tools try to keep out of the way of the user by only indexing while the computer would otherwise be doing nothing. Have you tried using other desktop search tools? I use Google's deskstop search. The indexing process keeps out of my way, but it comes with a sidebar and gadgets (which I like) and their associated memory footprint.

Trying Googling for a review of desktop search tools to check out your options. They're all slightly different and none is obviously better than all the others at the moment.
posted by hAndrew at 8:04 PM on March 29, 2007

Also, would you be willing to pay money to make PowerDesk Pro use less memory? If so, consider upgrading the amount of RAM in your computer. I'm sure an upgrade of practically any size will more than cancel out whatever memory PowerDesk Pro is using, and you will enjoy the usual attendant benefits of additional RAM.
posted by hAndrew at 8:11 PM on March 29, 2007

I know exactly how indexing works. And yes, there ARE ways to search without using a database. Is it as fast? No. But it's a helluva lot faster than the XP search. PD PRO managed to do it and I know there are others. I just thought I would ask if anyone here knew of a tool that didn't use the indexing before I installed one I know about. Fast file searching (relative to the built-in XP 'search') is possible without indexing all your files in a compacted database.

Why don't I want to use the indexing? Maybe some of you aren't into the privacy thing - I am. I don't want a database with the name of every single filename listed. If you have a file that is on your system for 30 minutes, the indexing may "update" with that filename before it is securely removed. It's a personal preference, that's all.

cyrusdogstar, what difference does the hypen make? It doesn't have anything to do with anything. Are you feeling a little superior tonight? I'm sorry, but you're telling me I don't know how indexing works kinda rankled me. It's because I DO know how it works that I don't want it.

-
posted by Gerard Sorme at 8:12 PM on March 29, 2007

If it's privacy you're worried about, then would encrypting the index solve your problem?

There's a limit to how fast straight file searching can get and with disks being as large as they are nowadays you're just not going to get anything that can search an entire system in a reasonable amount of time.
posted by rdr at 9:37 PM on March 29, 2007

And yes, there ARE ways to search without using a database. Is it as fast? No. But it's a helluva lot faster than the XP search.

Um, no. The limiting factor on the XP search is HD bandwidth. Take a look at the performance monitor while doing a search and you'll see that the CPU isn't pegged.

There isn't any faster way to do a non-indexed search than the one XP uses. It's grabbing data off the HD as fast as it can, and there's no way to speed that up any further.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 9:39 PM on March 29, 2007

Gerard, people who post responses here generally do so because they are interested and want to help. They try to imagine themselves in your position, and use their own experience to try to think of new solutions to your problem.

To me, it doesn't seem like cyrusdogstar was feeling 'a little superior'. Even if people are rude to you, I would suggest always being polite to them anyway, because this will encourage further people to post helpful responses to your question.

Because you've given even more information about your problem, I'm sure there are some people with new ideas for helping you find the right search tool. I hope they won't decline from posting out of fear that their response will be misinterpreted.

Personally, I can say I don't know of any desktop search tools that don't create an index. Wikipedia's article on desktop search states that "Desktop search engines build and maintain an index database ...", so I think for most people desktop searching is synonymous with the creation of an index. I agree with you that XP's search can be improved on without creating an index. For example its linear-time search could be designed to search files and folders in a more intelligent order. Good luck finding the right tool.
posted by hAndrew at 9:42 PM on March 29, 2007

If it's privacy you're worried about, then would encrypting the index solve your problem?

Good idea rdr. Google's desktop search offers to encrypt the index file, although I've never tried that feature myself. It also allows the user to see all the items and index and remove them manually if desired.
posted by hAndrew at 9:54 PM on March 29, 2007

Steven C. Den Beste, I can promise you that relatively fast file retrieval is possible without indexing and it can be done faster than Windows XP built-in search tool.

Thank you all very much for the suggestions. I think I have what I need now.

All the best for a good end-of-the-week and a great weekend!

-
posted by Gerard Sorme at 10:07 PM on March 29, 2007

Open a command prompt.

Change the directory to the one you want to search.

Type

findstr /i /s /c:"(searchterm)" *.doc *.txt *.html

replacing (searchterm) with whatever you're searching for, and *.doc *.txt *.html with as many filetypes you want to search (or just *.* for everything).

Slower than an indexed search, but faster than XP's GUI-based search.
posted by helios at 10:53 PM on March 29, 2007

friends and i have been happy with agent ransack as a fast alternative to xp's search.
posted by bruceo at 11:51 PM on March 29, 2007

As you say, Den Beste is wrong and is talking out of his ass (yet again). XP's search is notoriously inefficient as well as having numerous other problems. Also, people should answer the question which is asked, not an unasked question they wish to answer instead. Gerard wants a non-indexed search tool. He doesn't need to be told he should use an indexed search tool. This should be obvious.

I've heard good things about FileLocater Pro/Agent Ransack, and I believe (but am not certain) that it is a live, not indexed, search engine.

On Preview: I see bruceo has beaten me to the punch.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:55 PM on March 29, 2007

I just downloaded Agent Ransack, and it was clearly slower than the default Windows XP search on the first pass.

On subsequent searches it was faster, but only because it was obviously indexing. So Agent Ransack is out.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 12:58 AM on March 30, 2007

First of all, XP search looks inside files, which is what makes it slow.

Second, by default NTFS indexes your drives. So you'll probably want to turn that off.

My suggestion would to do a "dir /s searchterm" in a command prompt.
posted by mphuie at 2:47 AM on March 30, 2007

mphuie: XP search only looks inside files if you specifically ask it to. The option is something like "containing text of: ..."

I certainly dont doubt there are other reasons its slow.
posted by rsanheim at 7:47 AM on March 30, 2007

Gerard Sorme:

Please see Helios's post above and mphuie's "dir /s". There is no appreciably faster non-indexed search under XP than dir or find, and I've tested a lot of these solutions.

In particular, find is a bit more sophisticated and controllable than dir, so I would recommend downloading the findutils package for windows.

Frankly, if there were an easy-to-install port out there of all the unix command line tools for windows, that would be ideal (and I'm not talking about cygwin).

Finally, it's been a while since I've used it, but I think Powerdesk keeps in each directory a hidden flat file of the directory's contents, which technically is an index.
posted by Pastabagel at 9:25 AM on March 30, 2007

I hate the XP search. I use the search feature of TextPad instead- it's flexible, support regular expressions, runs fast, remembers past searches, and is generally exactly what I need.
YMMV.
posted by Four Flavors at 9:47 AM on March 30, 2007

Frankly, if there were an easy-to-install port out there of all the unix command line tools for windows, that would be ideal (and I'm not talking about cygwin).

You could install Perl for Windows and then the Perl Power Tools, which is a project designed to "reimplement the classic Unix command set in pure Perl". I'm not sure how difficult that stuff is to install, though.

In this case, ppt find is probably the wrong solution. find written in Perl is probably going to be slow.

Also, it looks like the UnxUtils download link that mikeyk provided 404's, but this one has a zip file that you can download.
posted by paulus andronicus at 9:49 AM on March 30, 2007

Thanks for a great second half! These last answers have been excellent. I'm trying out several options. I got the UnxUtils from the alternative link provided by paulus. Good stuff - thanks again!

-
posted by Gerard Sorme at 4:07 PM on March 30, 2007

I'll bet half those you try just index and don't tell you about it.
posted by Mr. Gunn at 7:33 PM on April 1, 2007